[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: PATCH: Outlook compatible attachment naming
From:       Andreas Gungl <a.gungl () gmx ! de>
Date:       2004-04-30 19:32:50
Message-ID: 200404302132.52573 () gungl-dd ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Donnerstag, 29. April 2004 08:08, Till Adam wrote:
> In short, I think we should consider implementing this, even if it means
> we optionally produce mails that are not adhering to the latest rfcs, but
> to an obsoleted one.
>
> What do the others think?

It's said to be a very simple patch. But there was an argument that users 
are seldom able to apply it and patch their own KMail.

There seem to be a lot of users out there which depend on conversation with 
OL users. Why should we lock them out.
If we do it, we should implement it as optional IMO. I would show a dialog 
for each sent message with such encoded attachment names. It would state 
clearly that the message not standard compliant.
I.e. I would make it not too easy for those users. Remember, they can still 
patch KMail to avoid this reminder.

It's sad, but it's an important demand of the users.
Andreas
- -- 
    ~
  ' v '
 //   \\
/(     )\  Powered by Penguin.
  ^ ' ^

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAkqniVhjiFd4beU8RAkirAKCmOS43QgYb30l6Y1wKooSGnYzxIACfa/rB
L7fO9DEKqGRmjgSu9KAiGrw=
=j+9d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
KMail developers mailing list
KMail-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]