Re: format=flowed breakage
On 2007-03-20 11:46:58 +0000, Rocco Rutte wrote:
>>I disagree that the old mutt behavior is incorrect (to the best
>>of my knowledge, there is nothing that says a message MUST be
>>reflowed), but agree that other mailers' behavior might indeed
>>point at an error at the time of composing the message.
> I didn't say the old one is incorrect, leaving the text as-is is
Right. And I think it should be the preferred behavior.
> Anyway, can I take the last part as a vote for leaving the handler in? :)
Take it to mean that you've convinced me that the current behavior
is probably not a bug in the strict sense of the word, but that I'd
still prefer the old handler's behavior.
Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>