From: David Bremner <david@tethera.net>
To: "W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us>, Mark Walters
	<markwalters1009@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] emacs: Prefer Content-Description over filename for
	part buttons
In-Reply-To: <20140204013246.GQ19935@odin.tremily.us>
References: <877g9chbay.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>
 <cover.1391423201.git.wking@tremily.us>
	<27be295875a7df782a83c9a2c09d06f9d321fe9e.1391423201.git.wking@tremily.us>
	<87vbwwosuw.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> <20140203203418.GO14197@odin.tremily.us>
	<20140204013246.GQ19935@odin.tremily.us>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.17+53~g3e1d7f6 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2014 08:55:02 -0400
Message-ID: <87r47dojbt.fsf@zancas.localnet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Precedence: list

"W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us> writes:

>
> Rather than patching this in Emacs, maybe we should collapse the =E2=80=
=9Cnot
> set=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cset to empty string=E2=80=9D cases in notmuch-s=
how.c?  I can't think
> of any reasons why someone would want to distinguish those two cases,
> and it's easier all around if we standardize the representation as far
> upstream as possible.
>

Do the RFCs have anything to say about headers with empty content? If
not I'd be inclined to leave the CLI output as raw as possible, just
because people are always finding new ways to apply tools.

d