Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 7/4/06, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To be clear, AFAIK, there was never a patch for mod_mbox -- it was a
> Ruby file that only solved part of the problem. Again, AFAIK, no one
> ever wrote a patch in C for mod_mbox to attempt to resolve this issue.
I offered. The response was, and I quote, "Erm, no".
The "Erm, no" was in response to the approach, not the offer to help, IIRC.
If you're willing to fix the problem the right way, by adding real
support for character sets to mod_mbox, I'm sure nobody would have a
problem with that.
You chose to snip the portion where I argue that the approach I outlined
is necessary, at least as a fall-back/safety net. Care to explain why
such a fall-back/safety net isn't necessary or appropriate?
- Sam Ruby
