Ken wrote:
Can the people who want to have "attach" append mhbuild directives
explain what their thinking is, specifically why they think their
approach is preferrable? I went back and looked at the thread very
carefully, and none of the proponents of this approach really covered
why they thought this was better.
To me, the big advantage was simplifying that decision
logic that you presented. It just seems more complex
than necessary.
The ability to review/edit mhbuild output is a bonus,
but not a primary goal for me. Another bonus would be
to move error checking up: instead of send(1) tripping
over a nonexistant file, whatnow(1) would. That's not of
much value to me because I always ls before attach'ing,
so again it minor to me.
I have no problem putting parameters in pseudo-headers
rather than directives in the body, if that's where
you're headed.
David
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers