Ralph wrote:
I'd expect nmh users to be Unix users familiar with cat(1). I'd expect
it to make sense to them for that alone?
On the question of whether the option should be named so the default is
the -no-less version, I don't think that matters. More important is a
negative term isn't sought out to make that true so a double-negative
results when -no is prefixed.
Agreed. There are some other nmh program switches that default
to their -no form.
David
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers