Re: [bug-mailutils] POP3 code changes

[Alain Magloire]

> 
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 11:50:42AM -0500, Alain Magloire wrote:
> 
> > -  hum ... can we change the Reply-To header to be address@hidden too?
> 
> No. =)  http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
> 

Yes, I've read this before.  And still never quite agree with it.
It reminds me when I was working on GNU grep every new features was
a litany of emails about the "good" way to do things,
 "grep doing recursive .. Why just use 'find ..|..grep'"
 "grep doing yyyy .. why just do xxxxx"

  
> > - Anybody working on the POP3 code ?  May find some free time to work a 
> > little
> >   on this:
> 
> >    * The idea was to separate the framework (mailbox_t etc ..) from
> >      the implementation, so for example having POP3 code accessible 
> >      outside of mailbox_t etc .. so the header could be in
> >      mailutils/sys/pop3.h
> 
> >    * Not sure about the MH code, but if it was(clear separation) the
> >      Maildir stuff could be made easier.
> 
> Well, anything that helps maildir would be appreciated.  =) Basically, I
> want to get maildir into mailutils so that more Debian users can
> consider it.  I'm also hoping that some distro will choose our mailx as
> the default one of the system sometime.  I don't know how likely that
> is, though.  Having maildir and i18n will help that, though.

This was more a question for Sergey, is MH cleanly separated ?