On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 09:47:32PM +0200, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 08:00:57PM +0200, Omar Polo wrote:
> > On 2024/08/01 10:41:40 +0200, Walter Alejandro Iglesias <wai@roquesor.com> wrote:
> > > I fixed some mistakes and simplified a bit the code:
> > > 
> > >   https://en.roquesor.com/Downloads/mail_patches.tar.gz
> > > 
> > > I understand why my proposal doesn't attract too much attention, I can
> > > count only one person here using mail(1) as a MUA.  Anyway, I'd like to
> > > know if I'm doing something wrong.
> > > 
> > > At least I'd appreciate some guidance about the general procedure.
> > > Regarding the size, for example, I understand conceptually the
> > > convenience of splitting and committing a diff in small chunks to gain
> > > control and avoid introducing regressions, but isn't it necessary to
> > > test the full functional patches first, to evaluate what they do?
> > 
> > No, it is not.  For example, Date and User-agent are completely
> > orthogonal to MIME support or UTF8.
> 
> Haven't I posted separates diffs, one including Date and User-agent and
> another with the MIME headers?!!!
> 
> > So, while I'm happy to see this
> > interest in improving mail(1),
> 
> OK.  So according to you, mine is just interest.  My work and my time
> doesn't count at all.

What!?

There seems to be a big mis-understanding here.  Omar has given you a
decent constructive review of your proposed patches and yet you seem
unhappy with that for some reason.