ken wrote:
> >> Thoughts? I realize this is a significant behavior change
> >
> >+1. The `Forward' header is grabbing another one for nmh's use, in
> >addition to the existing `Attach'. Should we be using `Nmh-Forward' if
> >the user isn't likely to have the hassle of typing them most of the
> >time?
>
> Sigh. I think when we hashed this out last time, the (rough) consensus
> was that not puttting in a "Nmh-" prefix was fine. Attach had prior
> art (I think mutt used it), and Forward seems to be similarly named.
i vote for presenting the user with a user-friendly component name.
if conflict is an issue, could we make the names of these "special"
headers tuneable via a profile entry?
Nmh-Attach-Component: Attach
Nmh-Forward-Component: Forward
paul
=----------------------
paul fox, [email protected] (arlington, ma, where it's 45.1 degrees)
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
