Hi Ken,
I understand that some people find that useful, but I have not yet
been persuaded that it is nmh's job to provide an interface for
generic Unix text processing tools.
That was there, whether by design or accident, from the start. And I
suspect it was clearly by design. Regardless, it's part of the de facto
contract with MH users. I found that paper I was asking about, in nmh's
git. :-) This is the one that started me using MH.
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/nmh.git/plain/docs/historical/realwork.pdf
says
That is, the directory- and file-structure of UNIX is used directly.
As a result, any UNIX file-handling command can be applied to any
message.
Also, it's hard for me to get excited about writing a bunch of code
that will make nmh more complex for no gain to nmh.
It seems we're struggling with how to handle MIME replies within the
closed ecosystem of nmh. Almost as if it were a monolithic MUA.
If composition took a similar directory hierarchy as the draft, that
directory could be built-up piecemeal, partially with nmh's help, e.g.
repl(1), but also with normal Unix commands for the more unusual uses.
As needs become clearer through use, nmh can gain some of the more
common operations itself.
Cheers, Ralph.
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers