On Thu, 15 Mar 2018 22:17:25 +0100 Silvan Jegen <s.je...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Silvan, > I see, thanks! > > Still sounds to me like having patches as attachments just causes me > to have to change my default configuration though. > > What is the advantage of attaching the patches instead of just sending > them inline, I wonder. because not everyone uses Mutt. Having dedicated attachments is consistent when you send multiple patches, makes it easier to save them somewhere for people who use "normal" mail-clients (no offense against mutt of course). The most prominent reason I see though is that when people browse the mailing list archives of suckless.org, it's pretty much impossible to extract the patch files from the archived messages, however it is trivial when they are attachments. With best regards Laslo -- Laslo Hunhold <d...@frign.de>