Aaron Stone wrote:
Paul J Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Nice work on dbmail-util. But could you please apply that patch
to head as well?
Thanks, but I don't think it will be necessary. For one thing, we're not
going to have any transition period to worry about, and we may also want
to begin supporting multiple header blocks (or switch to exactly-two
blocks, which is a different thing to check for altogether).
I think it will be necessary. It's folly to think that everyone
converting to 2.1 will have a database with a correctly populated
is_header field. Besides since the work was already done adding it to
HEAD should be easy, and you never know if it might be needed to correct
a bug in the insertion code or something.
Short answer is, I can't see how this could hurt.
