Re: What should go into 1.5.7?
Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2005-01-26 10:46:38 -0600, Charles Cazabon wrote:
>
> > > But I don't think we need notalternates.
> >
> > I disagree.
>
> Actually, I think you both violently agree that unalternates should
> do what noalternates does.
Yes; my original question to the mutt list on this subject was me asking what
I was doing wrong in that it wasn't working that way. It turned out to be
working as designed, just designed not to do what needed to be done :).
My original message was here:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=108482073000007&r=1&w=2
The thread includes what I took to be an explanation of why alternates
shouldn't work the way I wanted it to work, and that's why I added it as
separate functionality...
Charles
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Cazabon <muttdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------