On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 04:10:24PM +1100, Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au> wrote:
> On 21Nov2020 13:07, raf <m...@raf.org> wrote: > >On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 10:32:03AM +1100, Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au> > >wrote: > >> New ticket for amending the manual entry here: > >> https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt/-/issues/302 > >> Comments on wording/clarity welcome. > > > >In general, I usually think saying "ignored" is > >ambiguous. Does it mean included but not interpreted as > >you might expect? Or does it mean skipped? i.e. > >deleted? > > I'll change "ignored" to "discarded", since that's what happens. The > parse code reads and assembles a header structure and ignored From_ > lines (ergo, they don't get into that header structure). > > >That code exerpt from parse.c seems to do something > >with the From_ header (setting hdr->received to > >something), so is it really being ignored? > > That's a different branch in the same loop, which ignores ">From ", > which I assume is a workaround for an even more garbled header. Basicly, > this code accepts a file which _looks_ like RFC822 headers and body, and > works around cruft which has historically leaked in (eg "From " and even > ">From "). > > >Note that I haven't read any other part of parse.c, > >just that exerpt, so I don't know what I'm talking about. > > I should have linked off to the code itself, here: > > https://gitlab.com/muttmua/mutt/-/blob/master/parse.c#L1593 > > >And I think the sentence is a bit back to front for > >comprehension purposes. Perhaps I'm being silly, but I > >think it should start by stating what the format is, > >and then go on to say that's it's flexible about it. > > > >How about something like this: > > > > The draft file is expected to contain just the email. > > It is not an mbox file. However, if an mbox From_ header > > is present, it will be accepted. > > Hmm. Pretty wordy. But not bad. How about: > > The draft file is expected to contain just an RFC822 email: > headers and a body. Although it is not an mbox file, if an mbox "From > " pseudo-header is present, it will be silently discarded. > > and I'll put a link to RFC822 and RFC5322 in the SEE ALSO section. > > Cheers, > Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au> that looks good. cheers, raf
