Re: [Nmh-workers] Changes to forw(1)

Paul F wrote:

> sure, but that's a bug.

I'm not sure about that.  What if the user has a legitimate reason
to use a such a header?  And we can't predict all such pseudoheader
names out into the future.  nmh should squat on the Nmh- namespace
to severely minimize this issue.

David

_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers