.-----------------.
| .---------------. |
| | _________ | |
| | |___ ___| | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | _| |_ | |
| | |_____| | |
| | | |
| '---------------' |
'-----------------'
Viewing comments for "Fix your mutt"
---
> rjc commented [2]:
Hey, there are other places on the Internet which don't even
support '+' in email addresses properly - looking at you
Twitter - where they strip everything, and including, '+'
all the way up to '@'. But I want to use a '+' address, FFS!
Rant aside, the post feels a bit melodramatic:
Mutt developers seem completely uninterested in changing
this [ ..]
There are three comments on that issue - none from Mutt
developers - last one from 8 months ago. No one objects -
the issue simply didn't get anybody's attention.
Either way, the GitLab issue has this crucial piece of
information:
While this perfectly conforms to the RFC [ ..]
Message-ID header specification goes all the way back to the
70s. It feels like Mutt isn't where things should be fixed.
> sevan commented [2]:
There are three comments on that issue - none from Mutt
developers - last one from 8 months ago. No one objects -
the issue simply didn't get anybody's attention.
One of the 2 people is the post author. Perhaps the lack of
response from a developer was taken as showing lack of
interest. (no idea, just trying to empathise)
.