On 2021-07-12 10:56, Leo Famulari wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 06:33:11AM +0300, Andrew Tropin wrote:
>> Agree, --enqueue is a feature and probably doesn't belong to the PM
>> repo, the rest is more like a fix.  Ok, let's see, what Martin will
>> reply to proposed changes and I'll adjust this patch accordingly.
>
> Thanks, let us know what happens. I use msmtp so I'm interested :)

On 2021-08-26 08:59, Martin Lambers wrote:

> Hi, sorry for the late response.

> I am not sure about the changes. Changing behavior via environment
> variables is fragile and non-obvious to users. And there's a reason
> 'make install' does not put msmtpq in the user's $PATH: in its
> current state, the script is really only an example that needs to be
> customized.

> I would prefer a more complete solution, possibly including a
> configuration file.

> But interest in updating or maintaining the script has been very low in
> the last years, so I assume the user base is very small. This would mean
> that just keeping it as an example is ok.

It seems that this script is unmaintained and served as an example.
Martin also proposed to take the maintanance responsibility of it in the
other message, but I needed it only for testing and don't use it anymore
and thus don't want to take this duty.

However, the patches themselves still seems good to me and they can be
useful for other people.  So we can keep them downstream and provide a
little more flexible version of msmtpq script for guix users or close
this ticket and keep them only in that thread for the history)

The first one is a little more userfriendly IMO, the second one reduces
maintanance burden, which also is a good thing.

I'm ok with both options.  LMKWYT.