[PATCH] notmuch/emacs: Observe the charset of encoded parts, where known.

[David Edmondson]

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:17:44 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there is a record of useful features and fixes that were not
> accepted to notmuch because of some implementation issues.  And
> interested people were using them in private repos for years.  (I do not
> say that it is always the right thing to do, or that it is the right
> thing in this particular case.)

I agree that this has happened. I think that it's a failure of the
project that it has become common, necessary and generally accepted.

> I would like to see the following changes:
> 
> * Properly handle charset with parameters in Emacs UI.  Currently it is
>   broken by your patch in one place at least:
>   `notmuch-show-handlers-for' would produce incorrect results for
>   content-type string with parameters.  In my patch [1] I did parse the
>   charset at top level and then changed all usages of it accordingly.
>   Making `notmuch-show-handlers-for' smarter about parameters may be
>   sufficient, but I would like to see some more details on why adding
>   parameters to content-type string does not break Emacs UI code in
>   other places.

Your patch modifies the output of 'notmuch show' such that it included
the full value of the content-type header, which means that it is
necessary to parse it more carefully in emacs to discover and (as
necessary) remove the parameters. The patch I posted doesn't do this,
preferring to pass the charset (if any) as a supplementary parameter and
leave the content-type as-is. This distinction means that the patch I
posted isn't broken in the way that you describe.

> * Add charset parameter for text/html parts only.

Version 2 of the patch does this.

> * Use `mail-header-parse-content-type' to parse content-type instead of
>   contructing the list for `mm-make-handle' manually.

That's not required, see above.

> * Add a proper XXX comment to notmuch-show code.

I'm happy to do that.

> I cannot say I would be happy about this patch after these changes.

Can you say why? I agree that it is not a solution to all problems, but
it is a workable solution to a specific problem.

> It would be a temporary hack anyway.

Agreed. Do you have any idea when you might be able to spend time on the
better approach?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20120112/13e6dd87/attachment.pgp>