>Ah. Well, if your argument is with the existence of whatnow as opposed >to the addition of attach to the existing whatnow we're in agreement. >As per other heated discussions on this list, there is a strong "don't >break things" mentality on this list (which got misplaced on the last >release) and the attachment code is the way it is in order to not break >things.
I'm not sure I'd used the word "misplaced" regarding the backwards compatibility issue ... that implies we don't know where it went :-) "Relaxed" might be better. Yes, I know you're probably still stinging a bit about getting bit by draft messages requiring a From: header. Believe me, that change wasn't made lightly and we had a serious debate about it (but with remarkably few dissenters). It's a constant balancing act between "make sure old stuff worked" and "bring in new features". Admittedly, that wasn't so much of a new features as cleaning up a bunch of junk which barely worked in the first place. But as a side effect we got a bunch of new features out of it. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
