Oddly enough, I have the exact opposite attitude... I will barely accept inlined patches (to the usb-storage driver, which I maintain). About 85-90% of the inlined patches I get won't apply cleanly because of whitespace mangling. MIME-attachments (of type text/plain) seem to have a _much_ higher success rate. Yes, the transition was painful. Heck, it still is. Some versions of Outlook still don't understand the RFC-compliant way of attaching a digital signature to a message -- I get complaints from people every so often that all they see is a blank message with two attachments, one of which is the "message" itself, and the other is my signature. Matt -- Matthew D. Dharm Senior Software Designer Momentum Computer Inc. 1815 Aston Ave. Suite 107 (760) 431-8663 X-115 Carlsbad, CA 92008-7310 Momentum Works For You www.momenco.com > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com > [mailto:owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com]On Behalf Of Ralf Baechle > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 7:06 AM > To: Maciej W. Rozycki > Cc: Guido Guenther; linux-mips@oss.sgi.com > Subject: Re: ip22 watchdog timer > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 03:41:49PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > > > How true. MIME - broken solution for a broken design > ;) More serious, > > > > Why broken? It's not broken for what it was invented > to, i.e. for > > passing unsafe characters via SMTP. Source patches do > not qualify as > > containing such. > > The transition time from pre-MIME to MIME was pretty > painful. If you'd > have gone through the same pains that I did during the MIME > introduction > you'd probably understand why I call it a broken fix for a > broken system. > Fortunately now that the childhood problems have been > solved MIME looks > alot saner but still I prefer plaintext for patches. > > Ralf >
