This entire discussion should be on mutt-dev. Followups set.
> Why can you set sig_dashes, if you could set it via signature? "signature" can be a file or a program. The signature turns out to be whatever is read from the file or whatever is printed to stdout by the program. This file or program may or may not include the dashes, so there's an option to let you tell mutt whether to assist by including them. The only simplification that doesn't remove functionality is to always assume that the signature provides its own dashes, and eliminate the sig_dashes variable. I would say that the reason for not doing that is that it's an extra hurdle for new users, who most likely assume that only the signature proper should be in the signature file. (If you're using a signature program, it's reasonable to assume you're an advanced user.) Maybe "conditionally redundant" describes sig_dashes, but it's not absolutely redundant. It may be redundant, but it depends on what the signature actually produces. I guess the proposed "signoff" variable is similarly "conditionally redundant", but logically we can: * express signoff in terms of sig_dashes + signature, or * express signature in terms of sig_dashes + signoff, or * express sig_dashes in terms of signoff + signature. Having all three is strictly redundant, so adding signoff adds complexity. Adding a variable should introduce simplicity, convenience, functionality, or some other value. It doesn't add simplicity or functionality. Does it really add convenience? How often do you need to change this in a way that you can't as easily change sig_dashes and signature? -- -D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] NSIT University of Chicago
