I gotta say that I'm stunned by the amount of activity (and unnecessary
vitriol) on this topic. Where were you guys when I was begging for feedback
before I committed the changes a decade ago?
I originally implemented the non-ASCII message bodies as
application/octet-stream
because something needed to be done and it seemed like a sensible thing to do at
the time. I've never used this feature.
The particular mechanics of the implementation where it includes information
on the temporary file is obviously a (non-critical) bug and should be fixed
independent of any other changes. I can take care of that.
I personally don't care whether or not non-ASCII message bodies are octet-stream
or MIMEd. I'm certainly willing to go along with the consensus here. But it
seems like every time things get close to consensus somebody chimes in who uses
it the way that it is.
For this reason, I still prefer that changing the behavior be done with an
option.
Is it possible to come to agreement on this and move forward?
Jon
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers