>To deal with the false directives when using attach: >WhatNow could look for any lines that begin with # during >the first call to "attach", and warn or refuse. Those who >use # for replied-to text would have to find something else. >Or we could get more sophisticated, back to the "challenging" >aspect above.
Okay, this sort of puts my finger on the issue in my mind. The reason this is cropping up now is that we want to get to the point where a MIME headers are always generated (I assume this is non-controversial). Using the tools we have, this means running mhbuild. This was never designed to be run all of the time, hence the issues with directives. The reason all of these various suggestions regarding putting mhbuild directives in the text feel wrong to me is that it BY DEFAULT assigns special meaning to the message body where there was none before. That seems like a major change, and just feels wrong. I know, David suggested looking for false mhbuild directives, but in addition to the technical challenges that just feels wrong to me; trying to guess what is and isn't a directive suggests to me that we're doing the wrong thing. It's fine for users who WANT to create mhbuild directives, but it just Seems Wrong that message bodies now assign special meaning to '#' at the beginning of the line. That would mean we're now unilaterally switching from users creating a "message draft" to a "mhbuild composition file". In contrast, the current implementation of attach that creates a special header actually feels "more" right; creating headers and having the tools use them to process a message is more the MH way, as we've seen time and time again. Can the people who want to have "attach" append mhbuild directives explain what their thinking is, specifically why they think their approach is preferrable? I went back and looked at the thread very carefully, and none of the proponents of this approach really covered why they thought this was better. Ok, Ralph did say that he wanted to look at the headers post-MIMEification to adjust them; I kinda feel that's an "expert mode" feature and people who want to do that are probably comfortable with mhbuild directives. I really do want to understand people's arguments before I make a decision. (It occurs to me that the logic to do the MIME to filetype mapping that is done in post really should be moved into mhbuild, as that's more mhbuild's job. Just an implementation detail, though). --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
