was there a consensus on this issue? (i'm assuming that there _was_
a consensus on ken's proposal for adding a Forward: header similar to
the current Attach:.)
There has not been.
Like I said before, I thought we had made this decision already. But
fine, if we want to revisit it then I am okay with that.
I guess this illustrates one problem with open-source projects; who makes
the decisions when people disagree? It's not that people who want
an Nmh- prefix are being unreasonable; I mean, I understand all of their
arguments; I just think my arguments are more compelling.
as i understand it, the only worry with not using an Nmh- prefix is
with leaking headers. since none of these are supposed to ever get
out, conscientious scrubbing should get rid of them. (lyndon claimed
they'd get out, but didn't offer an example of how, so i'm still
unclear on that.)
Personally, even if those headers DID leak out, I don't think it would
be the end of the world, or even a big deal at all.
--Ken
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers