[linux-elitists] Mutt install 101
Wed Nov 12 00:54:14 PST 2003
Quoting Nathaniel Smith (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> In defense of Pine, there are pretty good reasons to not support
> Mail-Followup-To, namely the fact that it's not standardized, was
> rejected from previous standardization efforts, and is reasonably
> likely to screw up any later attempts to get this Right in a standard.
I'm actually delighted at the irony of coming to the defence of Dan's
Mail-Followup-To is a good idea because it's far and away the best thing
we have. I don't buy that it'll screw up any later attempts to get this
Right, in the event it doesn't work out: A little contemplation of the
matter will suggest that such is a trivial implementation problem.
> The Pine developers:
Suppose Pine adopted Mail-Followup-To from that dead draft, and years
later there was a standard definition for Mail-Followup-To that was
incompatible with what Pine did. We would be told that it was our fault
for doing something non-standard and it would be proclaimed to the world
that "Pine is non-compliant with Internet standards.
Then you issue a new release, genius! And, if they wanted to be
particularly intelligent about it, they would offer a toggle in pinerc
for the feature they implement going in.
> JWZ with some more background and opinion:
Same thing the Pine guy said. Every bit as bogus.
> None of which is to say that respecting the headers wouldn't be a
> polite thing to do, being as the intention is clear and one's personal
> choices do not create de facto standards.
Cheers, "All power is delightful, but absolute power
Rick Moen is absolutely delightful." - Kenneth Tynan
More information about the linux-elitists