Ken Hornstein writes: > >>>I guess my question > >>to you would be, if we had a new mhl-like program that was MIME-aware, > >>why would you want to keep the old mhl around? > > > >Only to not break any scripts out there, that use it. > > As much as I love tormenting Jon Steinhart every time we change something > in a new nmh release, I'm trying to understand what would break. Well, > okay, I'm sure something somewhere will break for someone. But I think > if we have an old-style mhl configuration file around we can revert to > the previous behavior. > > But it would be good to hear from users; if mhl changed and started (for > example) parsing MIME messages and only displaying text parts, would that > break things for you? > > --Ken
OK, I may be too busy to contribute at the moment but I can't ignore provocative messages like this one :) I don't use any custom mhl so I'm fine if it changes. *BUT*, I think that the default behavior after the change should be the same as the default behavior today unless there's a good reason to change it. It would probably be nice for heavy mhl users to have a converter from old to new. BTW, this may just be laziness on my part, but one thing that really annoys me these days is receiving an email sent from a phone. The message displays just fine, but when I reply to it the original message doesn't get decoded; it's included as base-64. I also notice this with some other messages that are quoted/printable with the = stuff. Is there some way to make this work that I just haven't taken the trouble to do? If so, please clue me in. If not, it's something that I think needs to be addressed. Jon _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
