On Mon, 2015-08-03 at 16:49 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 12:45:24AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > On Sun, 2 Aug 2015, NeilBrown wrote:
> 
> > > Claws-mail doesn't make it easy to reply to attachments - you have to 
> > > use the clumsy "copy/paste/add '>'" that you describe. However asserting 
> > > that other people should follow a particular work flow because my tools 
> > > aren't very good does not sound like a convincing argument to me. If my 
> > > tools don't work with a workflow that is prima-facie reasonable, then it 
> > > is my tools that are at fault and I should fix them, not ask someone 
> > > else to change their workflow.
> 
> > Just in case anyone is collecting data-points from this discussion, pine 
> > doesn't make it really easy to include attachment text in-line in reply 
> > either.
> 
> mutt is a bit fun here - it only works if the attachment has a text MIME
> type which a lot of the systems that force people to attach patches seem
> to struggle with.

You mean the windows habit of attaching them as octet-stream types?  I
set my binary handler to be emacs (you could make it your editor of
choice) so I can pop it up on the attachment and cut and paste quote
from the editor.  I have to report that this does have some unwanted sid
effects in mozilla: some pdf attachments come as octet-stream as well
and the binary handler overrides the file type handler ...

James