Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-26 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 03/26/2012 11:21 AM, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > Does it make sense for the cli to canonicalize the content types to > always be lower case? Or should it continue to just pass the content > type exactly as it appears in the original message? Given that > consumers should parse it case insen

Re: Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-26 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:24:29 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 03/26/2012 11:21 AM, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > > Does it make sense for the cli to canonicalize the content types to > > always be lower case? Or should it continue to just pass the content > > type exactly as it appears in

Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-26 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 11:24:29 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 03/26/2012 11:21 AM, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > > Does it make sense for the cli to canonicalize the content types to > > always be lower case? Or should it continue to just pass the content > > type exactly as it appears in

Re: Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-26 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 03/26/2012 11:21 AM, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote: > Does it make sense for the cli to canonicalize the content types to > always be lower case? Or should it continue to just pass the content > type exactly as it appears in the original message? Given that > consumers should parse it case insen

Re: Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-26 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 18:19:50 -0600, Adam Wolfe Gordon wrote: > A bit of Googling indicates that MIME types should be case insensitive > (i.e. TEXT/PLAIN should match text/plain). Given this, I think it > makes sense to change the emacs function regardless of whether it > makes sense for the CLI t

Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-26 Thread Jameson Graef Rollins
On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 18:19:50 -0600, Adam Wolfe Gordon wrote: > A bit of Googling indicates that MIME types should be case insensitive > (i.e. TEXT/PLAIN should match text/plain). Given this, I think it > makes sense to change the emacs function regardless of whether it > makes sense for the CLI t

Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-24 Thread Mark Walters
I am not certain if this is a bug or a request to work around broken mailers. I tried replying to a message today (with recent git) and got an empty message. I looked at the json output for reply and it contains the message but the content type is TEXT/PLAIN rather than text/plain. This seems to

Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-24 Thread Adam Wolfe Gordon
Hi Mark, On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 15:49, Mark Walters wrote: > I am not certain if this is a bug or a request to work around broken > mailers. I tried replying to a message today (with recent git) and got > an empty message. I looked at the json output for reply and it contains > the message but

Re: Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-24 Thread Adam Wolfe Gordon
Hi Mark, On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 15:49, Mark Walters wrote: > I am not certain if this is a bug or a request to work around broken > mailers. I tried replying to a message today (with recent git) and got > an empty message. I looked at the json output for reply and it contains > the message but t

Reply code with TEXT/PLAIN

2012-03-24 Thread Mark Walters
I am not certain if this is a bug or a request to work around broken mailers. I tried replying to a message today (with recent git) and got an empty message. I looked at the json output for reply and it contains the message but the content type is TEXT/PLAIN rather than text/plain. This seems to