On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > I can't say I disagree with you, but I'll just note that all your > patches are base64 encoded, which is not really better <g>
Oops <blush/> (but, ..., but, ... mine are Text/PLAIN at least :)) Sorry, I did not realise that. Speaking of which, I don't have the slightest idea how to force Pine not to do that. Maybe the only way is to actually _insert_ the text of the patch at the end of the message, but as far as I know, there are some broken versions of Pine out that will mangle the patch in sublte ways. > IMO any mail that cannot be piped straight into patch should be rejected Agreed. I am sorry I caused you grief by sending you base64 patches, from my mailer POV they seemed to be "in clear". > but I don't do it because it would take me more time to > explain that to people sending patches and keep track of it all than > it takes me to decode them. Maybe we should put an auto-rejecter of > mime crap on the wine-patches list.. Yeah, that would be good. Maybe include something into the documentation describing how to send the patch using various mailers? -- Dimi.