On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:42:49 +0000, David Edmondson <d...@dme.org> wrote: > On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:17:44 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin > <dmitry.kuroch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think there is a record of useful features and fixes that were not > > accepted to notmuch because of some implementation issues. And > > interested people were using them in private repos for years. (I do not > > say that it is always the right thing to do, or that it is the right > > thing in this particular case.) > > I agree that this has happened. I think that it's a failure of the > project that it has become common, necessary and generally accepted. > > > I would like to see the following changes: > > > > * Properly handle charset with parameters in Emacs UI. Currently it is > > broken by your patch in one place at least: > > `notmuch-show-handlers-for' would produce incorrect results for > > content-type string with parameters. In my patch [1] I did parse the > > charset at top level and then changed all usages of it accordingly. > > Making `notmuch-show-handlers-for' smarter about parameters may be > > sufficient, but I would like to see some more details on why adding > > parameters to content-type string does not break Emacs UI code in > > other places. > > Your patch modifies the output of 'notmuch show' such that it included > the full value of the content-type header, which means that it is > necessary to parse it more carefully in emacs to discover and (as > necessary) remove the parameters. The patch I posted doesn't do this, > preferring to pass the charset (if any) as a supplementary parameter and > leave the content-type as-is. This distinction means that the patch I > posted isn't broken in the way that you describe. >
Sorry, I should have better look at the code. > > * Add charset parameter for text/html parts only. > > Version 2 of the patch does this. > > > * Use `mail-header-parse-content-type' to parse content-type instead of > > contructing the list for `mm-make-handle' manually. > > That's not required, see above. > > > * Add a proper XXX comment to notmuch-show code. > > I'm happy to do that. > > > I cannot say I would be happy about this patch after these changes. > > Can you say why? I agree that it is not a solution to all problems, but > it is a workable solution to a specific problem. > At the very least, because I did not really review the code, as you probably understood from my poor comments :) I do not have a strong preference here. If others do, I prefer to leave it for them to decide. > > It would be a temporary hack anyway. > > Agreed. Do you have any idea when you might be able to spend time on the > better approach? I hope to work on this once Austin's notmuch show rewrite is done. It is progressing, but I do not have any estimations. Regards, Dmitry _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch