Re: [msmtp-users] msmtp 1.6.0rc1 is released!

[grarpamp <grarpamp@...20...>]

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Martin Lambers <marlam@...23...> wrote:
> I think we can do something simpler: just tell msmtp that it should not
> add missing Date/From headers. The user then has full control over the
> mail headers and can put anything in them. No need to even tell msmtp
> about it, since it should not care.
>
> Given the current style of command/options, maybe
> add_missing_from_header on|off
> add_missing_date_header on|off
> (and for consistency maybe
> remove_bcc_header on|off
> to replace the keepbcc command, but of course with backwards
> compatibility).

> - Adding missing From and Date headers can now be disabled if
>   necessary. See add_missing_from_header and add_missing_date_header.
> - The old keepbcc command was replaced with remove_bcc_headers for
>   consistency (but the old command is still supported).

The rc2 mail prompted me to reply to this.
This simpler way seems better to me, and keeps msmtp from
becoming an MUA (writing user body strings into mail) as well.
Thanks.

>> Does anyone know of a community/formally developed spec/doc/link for
>> the MTA/MSA 'commandline interface' as called by MUA's (other than
>> "just clone what sendmail does"?]
>
> No, that's just it. Sendmail was first and set the "standard" for
> everyone else, with all its quirks and weaknesses. Even if somebody
> would write a specification or RFC now, nobody would care, because
> all programs must continue to work unchanged, so you have to be
> sendmail-compatible no matter what some spec says.

Similarly, yes. Which is why I was wondering if anyone had actually
turned that practice into a formally agreed spec. Because even sendmail
changes over time.