Hi,
I think this goes into the area of the dont-reveal-bcc.patch/write_bcc.patch
Debian and Gentoo both have this patch, which also contains some of its
rationales:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=467432
http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3337 (dead, is there a way to find its con
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:56:24AM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
As can be read from the Debian bug, the original rationale was to be
able to keep Bcc-header in the Fcc copy, but not reveal the Bcc header
to the MTA, so whatever policy/decision it has, it can never spill it to
the recipients.
Th
Hi Kevin,
On 01-11-2019 18:56:06 +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:56:24AM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> >As can be read from the Debian bug, the original rationale was to be
> >able to keep Bcc-header in the Fcc copy, but not reveal the Bcc header
> >to the MTA, so wha
On 01Nov2019 18:56, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
It sounds like this needs to be changed. I'm not sure I like the patch
as-is, but the basic idea sounds reasonable to me.
I see three possibilities:
1) Change the default of $write_bcc to 'no', and also change the
behavior so that Bcc is written
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 09:07:59AM +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote:
What do we do with removed options? Do the elicit errors from the mutt
startup, or maybe just a warning? (Thinking about using the same
muttrc on machines with different mutt versions.)
That's a good point, which I neglected to m
Just a couple thoughts after playing around a little bit with the
$send_multipart_alternative option recently added to master.
I think it would be nice to support some "magic" MIME type that the
filter could return to indicate that no alternative should be generated.
I may want to use this fo
On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 08:05:42PM -0400, Aaron Schrab wrote:
I think it would be nice to support some "magic" MIME type that the
filter could return to indicate that no alternative should be
generated. I may want to use this for an occasional message, but not
for the vast majority of messages
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 08:49:14AM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
Did you try previewing the message, or just sending it straight
through? It *might* work, if you don't use preview before sending.
Trying to preview will cause mutt to parse out the parts in a
receive-mode manner, which won't w
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 08:56:08AM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
I'll have to look at the code when I have more time. But I still
wonder if you sent the message, and whether the actual sent message
was corrupt or just the preview.
Okay, taking a quick peek, I see sending wouldn't work. The
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 09:18:14AM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
I don't want to over-complicate the code, but if there is a quick fix,
I'll see what I can do about this. I won't have a chance to work on
it until later this week though.
I put together a quick hack and pushed it up to
'kevi
10 matches
Mail list logo
