* On [010511 22:45] Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2001-05-11 15:56:33 -0400, adam morley wrote:
I've just been told that is non-standard though. which means
we are distributing a software package that is non-standard. is
that bad?
Is not _what_ standard? If we don't say
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 02:36:07PM +0200, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
* On [010511 22:45] Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2001-05-11 15:56:33 -0400, adam morley wrote:
I've just been told that is non-standard though. which means
we are distributing a software package that is
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:14:05AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
adam morley proclaimed on mutt-users that:
oh the mail-followup-to header might be a little weird, considering im using
list reply and mine might not be configured the same as yours.still
learning just how it
Using a large mallet, adam morley whacked out:
ignore *# this means ignore all lines by default
unignorefrom: subject to cc mail-followup-to \
date x-mailer x-url # this shows how nicely wrap long lines
well, i wanted to see it at message compose time, not at
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:49:26AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Using a large mallet, adam morley whacked out:
ignore * # this means ignore all lines by default
unignore from: subject to cc mail-followup-to \
date x-mailer x-url # this shows how nicely wrap
At 23:04 -0400 10 May 2001, adam morley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:43:28AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
format=flowed requires a lot more implementation than just adding a
content-type header, iirc.
I wouldn't really say a lot more (at least when not dealing
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 04:34:03AM -0500, Aaron Schrab wrote:
At 23:04 -0400 10 May 2001, adam morley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:43:28AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
format=flowed requires a lot more implementation than just adding a
content-type header,
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 04:34:03AM -0500, Aaron Schrab wrote:
At 23:04 -0400 10 May 2001, adam morley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:43:28AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
format=flowed requires a lot more implementation than just adding a
content-type header,
* On [010511 18:02] adam morley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your nested quoting was also done incorrectly. According to section 4.5
of RFC 2646 there should be no space between the '' marks at the start
of quoted lines.
that, my friend was mutts doing, not mine. so if someone could explain
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:04:50PM -0400, Sam Roberts wrote:
Quoting adam morley [EMAIL PROTECTED], who wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 04:34:03AM -0500, Aaron Schrab wrote:
At 23:04 -0400 10 May 2001, adam morley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:43:28AM +0530, Suresh
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 06:49:19PM +0200, Lawrence Mitchell wrote:
* On [010511 18:02] adam morley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your nested quoting was also done incorrectly. According to section 4.5
of RFC 2646 there should be no space between the '' marks at the start
of quoted lines.
On 2001-05-10 23:04:34 -0400, adam morley wrote:
well, if i write my messages so they are wrapped like this as you
will see in one second, then it can be classified as a flowed
message. a zero paragraph flowed message. hence my need to know
how to do such a thing. would require
On 2001-05-10 13:29:17 -0400, adam morley wrote:
so currently, the mime type of my message is text/plain. i want
to change this to text/plain; format=flowed for each outgoing mail
message. i didn't see this in the muttrc file or manual. thanks.
You could update to the latest CVS version.
On 2001-05-11 13:21:40 -0400, adam morley wrote:
ah, if mutts not putting in the right, then MUTT is what is
non-compliant, correct? i shouldn't have to make a vim macro to
fix mutt's non-compliance?
It's configurable, and the mutt version you are using doesn't even
claim that it's
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 07:45:46PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
On 2001-05-11 13:21:40 -0400, adam morley wrote:
ah, if mutts not putting in the right, then MUTT is what is
non-compliant, correct? i shouldn't have to make a vim macro to
fix mutt's non-compliance?
It's configurable,
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 01:37:16PM -0500, Paul Cox wrote:
On Friday, May 11, 2001, adam morley wrote:
ah, if mutts not putting in the right, then MUTT is what is non-compliant,
correct? i shouldn't have to make a vim macro to fix mutt's non-compliance?
indent_string
Type: string
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 06:58:08PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
On 2001-05-10 23:04:34 -0400, adam morley wrote:
well, if i write my messages so they are wrapped like this as you
will see in one second, then it can be classified as a flowed
message. a zero paragraph flowed message.
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 06:55:47PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
On 2001-05-10 13:29:17 -0400, adam morley wrote:
so currently, the mime type of my message is text/plain. i want
to change this to text/plain; format=flowed for each outgoing mail
message. i didn't see this in the muttrc
On 2001-05-11 15:56:33 -0400, adam morley wrote:
I've just been told that is non-standard though. which means
we are distributing a software package that is non-standard. is
that bad?
Is not _what_ standard? If we don't say this is format=flowed, we
also don't have to emit format=flowed.
On 2001-05-11 15:59:30 -0400, adam morley wrote:
ah, no line *should* be longer than 78 chras, correct? its a
should, not a must if i remember.
Which means that you shouldn't violate this unless you have a very
good reason (such as a long word) to violate it.
--
Thomas Roessler
On 2001-05-11 16:02:11 -0400, adam morley wrote:
that is not required by rfc 2646, it is a should statment. and it
is there for non-flow aware mail readers. we avoid this when not
wrapping and using fixed, as it aint flowed text.
You don't expect this to look nice in any usual mailer, do
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:43:58PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
On 2001-05-11 16:02:11 -0400, adam morley wrote:
that is not required by rfc 2646, it is a should statment. and it
is there for non-flow aware mail readers. we avoid this when not
wrapping and using fixed, as it aint
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 10:42:43PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
On 2001-05-11 15:59:30 -0400, adam morley wrote:
ah, no line *should* be longer than 78 chras, correct? its a
should, not a must if i remember.
Which means that you shouldn't violate this unless you have a very
good
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 05:29:44PM -0400, adam morley wrote:
my point is the reason for not violating said should clause is
archaic. my reason is that if your mail reader can't handle it, step
into the 21st century and get a reader that knows how to wrap text.
Mail systems unpredictably
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 02:48:27PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 05:29:44PM -0400, adam morley wrote:
my point is the reason for not violating said should clause is
archaic. my reason is that if your mail reader can't handle it, step
into the 21st century and
so currently, the mime type of my message is text/plain. i want to change this to
text/plain; format=flowed for each outgoing mail message. i didn't see this in the
muttrc file or manual. thanks.
--
thanks
adam
any and all ideas herein are the sole property of the author, with no implied
Quoting Mr. Wade [EMAIL PROTECTED], who wrote:
adam morley wrote:
so currently, the mime type of my message is text/plain. i want to change this to
text/plain; format=flowed for each outgoing mail message. i didn't see this in the
muttrc file or manual. thanks.
First thing's first:
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 02:03:05PM -0400, Sam Roberts typed:
You can edit the content-type type of the outgoing message with
ctrl-T and add ; format=flowed. Maybe there's a way of automateing
that, perhaps a hot-key that feeds the keyboard strokes to mutt?
format=flowed requires a lot more
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:43:28AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 02:03:05PM -0400, Sam Roberts typed:
You can edit the content-type type of the outgoing message with
ctrl-T and add ; format=flowed. Maybe there's a way of automateing
that, perhaps a hot-key
On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 12:43:28AM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 02:03:05PM -0400, Sam Roberts typed:
You can edit the content-type type of the outgoing message with
ctrl-T and add ; format=flowed. Maybe there's a way of automateing
that, perhaps a hot-key
adam morley proclaimed on mutt-users that:
oh the mail-followup-to header might be a little weird, considering im using
list reply and mine might not be configured the same as yours.still
learning just how it works.
Its pretty good
is there a way to display it?
ignore *
31 matches
Mail list logo
