VM-BUG: vm-followup-include-text parses multipart message wrong

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Julian Bradfield writes:

 > I don't think this is a bug - you just don't agree with the spec.

Which spec?  The docstring says "include text from the message", and
while that could be interpreted to mean "randomly selected bits",
normal practice is to include all of it.  If the spec is really this
cheesy, it should say so explicitly.  But I can't imagine Kyle would
say that the spec is to refuse to quote text unless it's in the first
part.  I think he'd say it's a bug.  (He might refuse to fix it, Kyle
being Kyle. :-)

I also seem to recall that VM DTRTs when handed a multipart message
with different parts containing different charsets.

 > MIME doesn't have a notion of include-and-quote,

MIME isn't relevant here; it's a wire protocol.  What the MUA *does*
is up to the MUA, MIME just tells it how to interpret what it gets off
the wire.

 > An alternative view, which is what you appear to want here, is that
 > you should include-and-quote the text seen when you view the message.
 > If that's what you want, VM will do it for you - see
 > vm-reply-include-presentation .

I don't know what "include presentation" means, though.  I probably
don't want the presentation if it includes audio or video, for
example.  I probably do want it if it's a spam-by-jpeg.

At the very least the documentation of these functions needs to be
improved.  In particular, -include-presentation forms need to say what
happens to those non-text objects that do end up getting displayed.
Do they get included as MIME parts containing the multimedia objects
they represent?