From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/35952 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Paduchih Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: (Patch) Cannot send unencoded text. Date: 19 Apr 2001 22:52:56 +0600 Sender: paduch@imm.uran.ru Message-ID: <87ae5c6dcn.fsf@ait.uran.ru> References: <87snj6zh98.fsf@ait.uran.ru> <878zkx6o9h.fsf@ait.uran.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035171620 5953 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:40:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:40:20 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 25081 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2001 16:56:32 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 25070 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2001 16:54:55 -0000 Original-Received: from atreyu.ural.net (HELO relay.uran.ru) (195.19.137.69) by gnus.org with SMTP; 19 Apr 2001 16:54:55 -0000 Original-Received: from ait.uran.ru (dialup38.uran.ru [195.19.137.228]) by relay.uran.ru (8.11.1/eTn) with ESMTP id f3JH2F369075 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 23:02:15 +0600 (ESS) Original-Received: from dima by ait.uran.ru with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 14qHfs-0001lz-00 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 22:52:56 +0600 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: <878zkx6o9h.fsf@ait.uran.ru> (Dmitry Paduchih's message of "19 Apr 2001 18:57:14 +0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnus v0.01) Emacs/20.7 Original-Lines: 26 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:35952 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:35952 Oops, please forgive me. I have found much simpler solution: ;;; Hm. (add-to-list 'rfc2047-header-encoding-alist '("Subject" . none)) It simply wasn't documented. :) >>>>> "DP" == Dmitry Paduchih writes: DP> Hi, DP> Here is a patch which is to allow sending messages with unencoded DP> headers. I mean a possibility to do that, the defaults say to encode DP> headers. I wrote in my yesterday letter the reasons why it is needed DP> in my opinion. But it is only kinda work-arround. DP> Seriously I think it is better to redesign the concept of DP> message-options if I understand it correctly. DP> Can somebody commit this patch? DP> Thanks in advance, DP> Dmitry