Re: nmh 1.8RC2, xlbiff, and $HOME

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi David,

> > This close to a release, I think we should stick with requiring HOME
> > to be non-empty if it's set as otherwise there's too many paths to
> > consider which the test harness probably doesn't exercise.
>
> I'd rather crank out an RC3 than pass up the opportunity to solidify
> the behaviour here.

The behaviour cannot solidify further.  :-)  It's clear, determinate,
predictable, and simple to document.

I thought RCn+1 was meant to be minimal differences from RCn?  That's
why Andy Bradford's POP3 patch is post 1.8.  Switching the behaviour of
a set-but-empty HOME now seems significant given some value for HOME
must be chosen.  And will mean another round of testing by others on top
of your time.

> Ken's point that different treatmet of unset vs empty HOME is a mistake
> is fairly compelling for me.

I've covered that in my reply to kre just now.

-- 
Cheers, Ralph.