🚀 go-pugleaf

blueman wrote:
> 
> OK - I found your revisions.

Actually, you didn't.  These were the old revisions that I had made 
before you even told us that you were interested in the 
vm-pipe-messages-to-command (the plural version of the operation).

I uploaded the current revision this morning.  I had intended to wait 
for your feedback before I uploaded the changes.  But...

> The way you implemented it is really just a kludge which adds an
> additional unnecessary variable vm-message-include-separators. 

You seem to love to argue about code.  I don't.  The code I like is 
simple, direct and clean.  It has a manual that is short, clear and 
understandable.  It has as few features as possible to serve the 
function it is designed to do, but these features would be as powerful 
as possible without being complex.  Unfortunately, VM is already well 
past all of these things.  I am only trying not to make it any worse 
than it is.

If I had my own way, I would never had added the plural version of the 
command (which has 3 versions) or its associated variables (2 of 
them).  I would have made the changes that you find in revision 664, 
which includes just this one variable vm-message-includes-separators 
and its effect on vm-pipe-message-to-command.

My reasoning would be as follows.  The official definition of a 
"message" includes headers and body, but not the separators.  But, 
apparently, some external applications want the separators as well. 
To allow the users to use those applications, I would provide a 
variable that includes separators along with the messages.  The users 
that need to use those applications would set that variable, either in 
their .vm file or in their own user-defined functions, and the job is 
done.  End of story.

If you still want to maintain that this is a "kludge", explain your 
reasoning.

----

But I am not proposing to delete your favourite functions and 
variables.  They were already there when I started and they will 
continue to be there.  I am only trying not to make it any worse than 
it is.  I don't have a plan to clean up VM.  It is too big a program 
for that.

----

One final remark.  You have mentioned that I was engaging in some kind 
of a public rebuke.  But it seems to me that you are one that is 
repeatedly choosing public fora to make your points.  People that are 
focused on solving problems are quite happy to report them on 
launchpad or send us a bug report, get the problems fixed and go on 
with their lives.  What is it that you are trying to do?

Cheers,
Uday