Hi Ken, > - It's not clear to me what the "right" behavior should be.
Clearly, you need to be more opinionated. :-) nmh is already happy to inc malformatted, see what I did there, emails, e.g. sortm later complains about unparsable dates, and I think that should continue. I'd expect and like repl to complain and not present me with a draft to edit. I can then investigate based on the error message. This suggests the failed attempt to parse the To header should ripple back up; longjmp FTW. ;-) Whether a template that didn't refer to To would spot the problem depends on if the existing code parses all interesting headers up front or only upon reference. I wouldn't expect this to change, just be documented. It's a rare enough occurence that investigation should result, not some stab at automated DWIM fixing. It Outlook starts doing this every weekday then we'd have more evidence upon which to do the right thing. Cheers, Ralph. _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
