I've changed the Subject and included [EMAIL PROTECTED] since we've spent the last year improving MIME handling in Gnus since raw MH wouldn't work for us. We should be able to provide some suggestions which would allow us to use more MH and less Gnus. Peter? Satyaki? Jon Steinhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My interest in m_getfld is because I'd like to experiment with the way > that attachments are shown. It'd be interesting to get a bit of > discussion on this. Basically, I don't like the way that message parts > are treated differently than messages. To me, there's little > difference between receiving a message with two attachments and three > messages. I'd like to see an indented scan that shows something like > > 5785+ 11/19 Eric Gillespie Re: The continuing install-mh saga<<Jon Steinhar > .1 <image/jpeg> > .2 <image/jpeg> > > ant then be able to do show/next/prev on stuff. I find it really > annoying to have all body parts displayed in a single batch, > especially those that involve some interaction to get rid of, like > closing an image viewer. This might be an intriguing option to some, but it should not be the default. I wouldn't enable it. There is too much crap out there that would pollute the scan listing and make it awkward to read mail quickly. I can safely say that I do not view the majority of attachments I receive and considering them as separate messages would simply add the to (often oppressive) pile of mail. Consider all the midi and html attachments in spam, and winmail.dat attachments, and vCards, and multipart/encrypted which you would want to present as a single message rather than the pieces. To name just a few. You'll be sure to generate some good ideas though. Capture them in a Feature Request at Savannah. -- Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.newt.com/wohler/ GnuPG ID:610BD9AD Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and mh-e. Vote Libertarian! If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.
