bug#41096: message-sendmail-f-is-evil has hard to understand docstring

bug#41096: message-sendmail-f-is-evil has hard to understand docstring

[Stefan Kangas]

I'm having some trouble parsing this documentation:

‘message-sendmail-f-is-evil’
     Non-‘nil’ means don’t add ‘-f username’ to the sendmail command
     line.  Doing so would be even more evil than leaving it out.

So when would I use it?  And what is evil, to have it set to nil or
non-nil or what?  Is there a double negation in there?

Could someone who knows what this is all about please consider
clarifying this documentation for mere mortals like me?  Thanks.  :-)

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

bug#41096: message-sendmail-f-is-evil has hard to understand docstring

[Glenn Morris]

The first sentence seems clear to me. If you are using sendmail to send
mail, and don't want Emacs to pass the "-f" option to sendmail, set this
non-nil. If you want to know what the -f option does, see man sendmail.
If you aren't using sendmail to send mail, ignore it.

(The evil part is a 20+ year old joke. Perhaps you want to rename it to
a prosaic message-sendmail-specify-envelope-from.)

bug#41096: message-sendmail-f-is-evil has hard to understand docstring

[Stefan Kangas]

Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> writes:

> (The evil part is a 20+ year old joke. Perhaps you want to rename it to
> a prosaic message-sendmail-specify-envelope-from.)

I think we can keep the joke even if I don't get it.

The thing is that I don't understand the docstring as a whole.  The
first part is fine, but the joke confuses me and makes me wonder what
I missed.

I think it would be enough to add a short explanatory note for why
this option exists at the end, for example that some sendmail
alternatives do not support "-f".   I only hope that wouldn't ruin the
joke...?  :-)

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

bug#41096: message-sendmail-f-is-evil has hard to understand docstring

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> writes:

> The thing is that I don't understand the docstring as a whole.  The
> first part is fine, but the joke confuses me and makes me wonder what
> I missed.
>
> I think it would be enough to add a short explanatory note for why
> this option exists at the end, for example that some sendmail
> alternatives do not support "-f".   I only hope that wouldn't ruin the
> joke...?  :-)

Yeah, I don't understand the doc string, either.

There's also feedmail-sendmail-f-doesnt-sell-me-out, which is a jokey
name along the same lines...

But what -f username does is set the MAIL FROM value when doing the SMTP
negotiation.  USERNAME will then end up in the Received line in the
message.  Some MTAs don't allow this to be set willy-nilly by everybody,
but some do.  The doc string of the feedmail variable has an exegesis on
the subject...

I think the doc string should just be rewritten to attempt less humour.  :-)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#41096: message-sendmail-f-is-evil has hard to understand docstring

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> I think the doc string should just be rewritten to attempt less humour.  :-)

I've now done so in Emacs 28 and added a link to the feedmail variable
which explains it all in depth.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#41096: message-sendmail-f-is-evil has hard to understand docstring

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Date: Tue, 5 May 2020 20:05:40 +0200
> Cc: 41096@debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> The thing is that I don't understand the docstring as a whole.  The
> first part is fine, but the joke confuses me and makes me wonder what
> I missed.

Here's one attempt to de-confuse it:

     Non-nil means don't add '-f username' to the sendmail command
     line.  Using that option would be even more evil than leaving
     it out.