david wrote:
Ken wrote:
Can the people who want to have attach append mhbuild directives
explain what their thinking is, specifically why they think their
approach is preferrable? I went back and looked at the thread very
carefully, and none of the proponents of this approach
Paul wrote:
that's an interesting point, and i just realized that it's one reason
i've never been comfortable with attach. my editor supports enough
filename completion that when inserting the mhbuild directive (via a
helper script), i can be sure that the filename is spelled correctly
and
Hi Ken,
The reason this is cropping up now is that we want to get to the point
where a MIME headers are always generated (I assume this is
non-controversial).
Looks down. Mumbles No. Scuffs foot.
Using the tools we have, this means running mhbuild. This was never
designed to be run all
Ralph Corderoy writes:
Hi Ken,
The reason this is cropping up now is that we want to get to the point
where a MIME headers are always generated (I assume this is
non-controversial).
Looks down. Mumbles No. Scuffs foot.
No, I don't always want MIME headers. I'm old-fashioned and
Hi Jon,
No, sorry, when I said edit I was referring to a whatnow-entry to
put me back in vi so I can read-only peruse the outcome of mime.
My intent is always to have mime do the work; if something's not
right I go back to pre-mime and fix it because mhbuild could
always do want I want
Ralph Corderoy writes:
Hi Jon,
No, sorry, when I said edit I was referring to a whatnow-entry to
put me back in vi so I can read-only peruse the outcome of mime.
My intent is always to have mime do the work; if something's not
right I go back to pre-mime and fix it because mhbuild
david wrote:
Paul wrote:
that's an interesting point, and i just realized that it's one reason
i've never been comfortable with attach. my editor supports enough
filename completion that when inserting the mhbuild directive (via a
helper script), i can be sure that the filename
