Re: [Nmh-workers] New mhbuild directives

[David Levine]

> >Ken, when you first mentioned "a more generic mechanism", I was
> >thinking along the lines of
> >"mhbuild-disposition-<type>/<subtype>: inline" profile entries.
> >mhn.defaults could provide those for text/calendar and possibly
> >message/rfc822.  Users could override as they wish in their
> >profile.
> >
> >Forcing every nmh user to learn all the exceptions, and remember
> >them every time they Attach:, is as user unfriendly as we could
> >get.
> 
> Hrm.  I was thinking that a user might want to inline particular parts
> on a per-message basis, but I cannot really think of a valid use case
> there; the ones that come to mind are all done on a content-type basis,
> and the more complicated things are better done as mhbuild directives
> anyway.  And your point about being user unfriendly is well taken.  Out
> of every possibility discussed so far I think your solution is the best.
> Also, it's probably the least amount of code.

Committed on master, including mhn.defaults entries for
text/calendar and message/rfc822.  The man page discussions
are specific to Attach:, though the mhbuild-disposition-*
profile entry doesn't hint at that.  But I think that

    mhbuild-attach-content-dispostion-text/calender: inline

is too wordy and confusing, though I don't feel strongly about
what it's called.

David