[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [nmh-workers] Change {encrypted} to %(encrypted) in mh-format

From: Valdis Klētnieks
Subject: Re: [nmh-workers] Change {encrypted} to %(encrypted) in mh-format
Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 09:39:59 -0400

On Thu, 16 May 2019 23:10:32 -0400, Ken Hornstein said:

> >Note that 'E' in the format is different to the alternate annotations
> >that can occur in the same position (and trump the E if more than one
> >applies) in that the others tell what I have done to the message
> >(that I have replied, or forwarded it) - which is useful information
> >to have in the scan listing.   Random extracts related to content type
> >is not.
> I'll let you and Valdis fight THAT one out :-)

My point was actually just that if we're dragging around an E for encrypted, we
may want an S for signed as well, when the latter is much more common, at least
in the mail I get.

The other stuff in my quote is *ancient* - I'm talking "measuring the uptake
of RFC1341" levels of ancient, and thus can probably leave - I see at least two 
special-case lines in my default scan that have been obsolete since Virginia 
decommissioned their IBM 3090 mainframe Dec 1, 1999.

My .procmailrc probably has equally out of date stuff in it.. :)

Attachment: pgpYQtO81ZLI5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]