Re: [Nmh-workers] Items for nmh 1.7

[Jon Steinhart]

Ken Hornstein writes:
> >>>I guess my question
> >>to you would be, if we had a new mhl-like program that was MIME-aware,
> >>why would you want to keep the old mhl around?
> >
> >Only to not break any scripts out there, that use it.
> 
> As much as I love tormenting Jon Steinhart every time we change something
> in a new nmh release, I'm trying to understand what would break.  Well,
> okay, I'm sure something somewhere will break for someone.  But I think
> if we have an old-style mhl configuration file around we can revert to
> the previous behavior.
> 
> But it would be good to hear from users; if mhl changed and started (for
> example) parsing MIME messages and only displaying text parts, would that
> break things for you?
> 
> --Ken

OK, I may be too busy to contribute at the moment but I can't ignore
provocative messages like this one :)

I don't use any custom mhl so I'm fine if it changes.  *BUT*, I think that
the default behavior after the change should be the same as the default
behavior today unless there's a good reason to change it.  It would probably
be nice for heavy mhl users to have a converter from old to new.

BTW, this may just be laziness on my part, but one thing that really annoys
me these days is receiving an email sent from a phone.  The message displays
just fine, but when I reply to it the original message doesn't get decoded;
it's included as base-64.  I also notice this with some other messages that
are quoted/printable with the = stuff.  Is there some way to make this work
that I just haven't taken the trouble to do?  If so, please clue me in.  If
not, it's something that I think needs to be addressed.

Jon