From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Alexander Pohoyda" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: RMAIL, MIME-related bug Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:27:40 +0200 (MEST) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <2872.1066310860@www21.gmx.net> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1066310940 24158 80.91.224.253 (16 Oct 2003 13:29:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:29:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@elta.co.il, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 16 15:28:57 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AA8BV-0008EO-00 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:28:57 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AA8BV-00069E-00 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:28:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AA8BE-0005h9-Qu for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:28:40 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AA8B5-0005fN-Ba for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:28:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1AA8AX-0005NG-1z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:28:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [213.165.64.20] (helo=mail.gmx.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AA8AJ-0005FG-7A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 09:27:43 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 10175 invoked by uid 0); 16 Oct 2003 13:27:40 -0000 Original-Received: from 194.39.131.40 by www21.gmx.net with HTTP; Thu, 16 Oct 2003 15:27:40 +0200 (MEST) Original-To: Thien-Thi Nguyen X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Authenticated: #14602519 X-Mailer: WWW-Mail 1.6 (Global Message Exchange) X-Flags: 0001 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:17148 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:17148 > That's what I'm trying to hear in this discussion. Can't we just > hide header fields instead of creating another "simplified" header in > between of the message and thus braking it? > > you have the right idea. hiding is the desired functionality, and > currently, deleting is the implementation. it's probably ok to keep the > functionality and choose a more desirable implementation (overlays, for > example). then when someone complains about the change breaking their > code you can say "that was an implementation detail". then, they will > of course ask you for your high-level design and API, in order to avoid > being burned in the future. then, you will know you have thought about > things in the right way from the beginning. Sorry, but I do not understand what you propose here. Not to change anything because it may brake some code? I'm afraid you are right. Too much code may be based on current implementation. -- Alexander Pohoyda PGP Key fingerprint: 7F C9 CC 5A 75 CD 89 72 15 54 5F 62 20 23 C6 44