* 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 [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 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 2001-05-11 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 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.
