On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 08:15:18PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:12:26PM -0400, A. Craig West wrote:
>
> > The recommended method replying is actually not strict bottom-posting. It is
> > EDITED bottom posting, where you only keep enough of the previous message to
> > keep the context obvious.
>
> One of the nicer features of mutt is its ability to toggle the display
> of quoted material (or simply skip past it). By default these actions
> are bound to the "T" and "S" keys in the pager screen.
Cool! Didn't know about these!
[snip]
> Mail is all about processing text quickly. I really hate taking my
> hands off the keyboard when processing text (which is why I rarely use
> GUI mail clients -- and refuse to use any that don't let me use vim
> while composing).
Here here!!! Anyone that does not understand the gravity of
these statements, would do well to force themselves to use vim
for a month, and then see how they feel.
> Sadly, the IMAP support in mutt is somewhat lacking. It'll ask for
> header info for all umpteen bazillion messages in a folder before it
> presents the summary of the last 20 or so messages actually required to
> display the folder summary. IMAP is the ONLY thing that pine does
> better than mutt, IMHO.
fetchmail, cron, and procmail all the way. These tools combined
do a FAR better job than any kitchen sink mail client could hope
to. Also, though, there is that new SPAM killer POP-3 client
that learns from you what is SPAM and what is not. I forget what
it's called. Could probably substitute it in for fetchmail, but
I haven't tried it out yet.
Oh wait, are you referring to leaving mail on the server? You
can of course use fetchmail and have it only fetch _new_ mail
each time. And then if you occasionally want to tell fetchmail
to delete messages that are already read on the server, you can
give it the -F option.
- richard
--
Richard Kilgore
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
