On Thu, 15 Mar 2018 22:17:25 +0100
Silvan Jegen <s.jegen_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Silvan,
> I see, thanks!
>
> Still sounds to me like having patches as attachments just causes me
> to have to change my default configuration though.
>
> What is the advantage of attaching the patches instead of just sending
> them inline, I wonder.
because not everyone uses Mutt. Having dedicated attachments is
consistent when you send multiple patches, makes it easier to save them
somewhere for people who use "normal" mail-clients (no offense against
mutt of course).
The most prominent reason I see though is that when people browse the
mailing list archives of suckless.org, it's pretty much impossible to
extract the patch files from the archived messages, however it is
trivial when they are attachments.
With best regards
Laslo
--
Laslo Hunhold <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Thu Mar 15 2018 - 22:39:06 CET