Dear Ricardo, Thanks for investigating!
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Ricardo Mones <mo...@debian.org> wrote: > > Thanks for searching, but that patch is completely useless to current > Sylpheed, sorry. After searching around, I find maybe "noname" way is following RFC[0], but most mutt user to choose "signature.asc" way (as you can see in debian lists), and major mail clients, such as gmail, don't recognize "noname" way (maybe it just cannot verify the signature, so it choose to simply show as attachment). So I think it's better let user decide which one to choose. [0] http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2968 Cheers, -- Roger Shimizu, GMT +9 Tokyo PGP/GPG: 4096R/6C6ACD6417B3ACB1
