Re: multipart/alternative question
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:31:26AM -0400, Tim Gray wrote: > On Wed 15, Jul'09 at 10:08 PM -0600, lee wrote: >> And more general, is there a way to get an indication that a mail does >> have an attachment or attachments? I would give them a different color >> in the list; that would prevent me from opening such messages without >> checking them before. > > You could set up a coloring rule using the ~X matching pattern. > Something like: > > color index red default "~X 1-" > > should work. Hm, I was reading the manual, and there's an object "attachment" that can be used with "color". But I don't understand what that is for: color attachment brightred black doesn't do what I thought it might. > You can also use the %X sequence in your index_format > definition to display the number of attachments in a message. However, I > don't think either of those methods pick up on inline attachments. Hm, I would expect that attachments are attachments and count as such ... I 1 [multipa/alternativ, 7bit, 2.0K] I 2 > [text/plain, quoted, iso-8859-1, 0.7K] I 3 > [text/html, quoted, iso-8859-1, 1.0K] I 4 [text/plain, 7bit, us-ascii, 0.2K] For that one, %X says the mail has 1 (one) attachment. But apparently it has 4 attachments, so what's %X for? >> Other than that, if I get a mail that isn't readable, I delete it. If >> someone sends me a mail but makes it difficult to read, he obviously >> doesn't care if I read it or not, so why should I waste my time with >> it. > > Unfortunately I have collaborators whom I must work with who aren't > particularly email savvy. I can't just toss their emails. Perhaps you can help them to fix their MUAs? If you can find out if what they are doing is compliant with RFCs or not, you could act accordingly. Unfortunately that's a difficult task, but if they are compliant, you need to change something on your side. It's hard to examine the problem without having an example email ... What happens when you notice that you got such a mail and have mutt display what attachments there are? Can you view the attachments from there?
Re: multipart/alternative question
On Wed 15, Jul'09 at 10:08 PM -0600, lee wrote: And more general, is there a way to get an indication that a mail does have an attachment or attachments? I would give them a different color in the list; that would prevent me from opening such messages without checking them before. You could set up a coloring rule using the ~X matching pattern. Something like: color index red default "~X 1-" should work. You can also use the %X sequence in your index_format definition to display the number of attachments in a message. However, I don't think either of those methods pick up on inline attachments. Other than that, if I get a mail that isn't readable, I delete it. If someone sends me a mail but makes it difficult to read, he obviously doesn't care if I read it or not, so why should I waste my time with it. Unfortunately I have collaborators whom I must work with who aren't particularly email savvy. I can't just toss their emails.
Re: split display?
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:46:16PM -0400, Tim Gray wrote: > On Wed 15, Jul'09 at 8:23 PM -0600, lee wrote: >> Is there a way to make the sent mails easier to distinguish from the >> received ones, like giving them a different color in the list? If >> there is, I could try storing them in the inbox. However, the only >> purpose of that would be to make it easier to later move them into the >> final storage together with the recieved mails. > > I'm going to pipe in as a mutt newbie, but yes: > color index yellow default ~P > should color all messages from you red. > > Also, if a thread breaks (or is inappropriate extended) you can make use > of mutt's break-thread and link-thread commands. Cool, thanks! I'll try that out!
Re: multipart/alternative question
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:02:38PM -0400, Tim Gray wrote: > So, what is the best way to deal with this? Is there anyway to just > prefer the text/plain but look for attachments in the text/html branch? > Or have an indication that there is a text/html branch onscreen so I know > to look there? And more general, is there a way to get an indication that a mail does have an attachment or attachments? I would give them a different color in the list; that would prevent me from opening such messages without checking them before. Other than that, if I get a mail that isn't readable, I delete it. If someone sends me a mail but makes it difficult to read, he obviously doesn't care if I read it or not, so why should I waste my time with it.
Re: split display?
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 04:48:56PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 02:01:57PM -0600, lee wrote: > > I would need to know exactly which pattern will show only those > > messages I want to see, and all of them. I don't know such patterns. I > > might have an idea of what I could search for, but it only means that > > I eventually have to spend a lot of time searching and trying to > > figure out search patterns. > > So, in other words, you would need to manually mark the message as > belonging to a category. You would need to take action to associate > the message with a category. So, what's the problem with just moving > the mail to a category-specific mail folder, exactly? 1.) It is awkward. 2.) It would mess up the folder hierarchy I already have by greatly increasing the number of folders. It's too complicated. 3.) It's incompatible with the folder hierarchy I have. 4.) The messages would be out of sight and not easy to access and would be forgotten. If there's another new message that would belong to a category I have, I would have to browse through the folder hierarchy, and I would have to remember for each directory I see in the list if it's a maildir or a directory that contains maildirs. Changing folders in mutt is fumbly (c TAB TAB enter CTRL-g CTRL-g c TAB TAB down down ... enter ?? q ??? CTRL-g ... Hmm.? c ...). 5.) There's no way to delete maildirs from within mutt. Mutt is not a file manager and shouldn't have to be one. > As far as I can see, what you're trying to accomplish is exactly why > mail clients have the ability to handle mail in multiple mail folders: > When you receive a message that you think belongs in a particular > category, move (or copy!) it into a mail folder associated with that > category. Yeah, I think I can understand why you say that. But it's not the way I'm using mail folders, or the purpose I'm using them for. What I'm using them for is to keep mail from mailing lists separate and as a final storage for mails I'm done with. What I'm not done with has to stay in the inbox so that I keep being remembered of it and don't have to remember that I should search for something and do something with/about it. > Better yet, let a filtering program like procmail do it for you. Before the computer is able to understand what mails are about, such programs remain unable to decide into what category I might want to put a particular mail. To edit my .forward file so that a mail is delivered into the appropriate maildir (category), I would have to predict that I'm going to get this mail and to predict the contents of it. It works fine for mailing lists because it is predictable that I'm going to get mail from them and what search pattern can be used to identify mail from the list, but that's it. Once the list admin makes a change and the same search pattern isn't in the mail anymore, it won't be delivered into the correct directory. And I'm hoping that computers never get intelligent enough to read my mail. > You could probably even do something funky like rig up a macro > to change the list of mailboxes to which mutt pays attention to just > those associated with categories, and then rig up a second one to > change them back to "normal" mode. Mutt has folder hooks and other > interesting mechanisms to make sure that if you want, sent mail can be > saved to the same category-specific folder, etc.. Well, I wouldn't want to separate working with categories from working with incoming mail. Using different maildirs to simulate categories creates such a separation. That is precisely what I'm trying to avoid. Separation is for mailing lists and for final storage. That's what I'm using different maildirs for. It's not applicable to mail in the inbox I'm not done with. I wouldn't mind if mutt could handle categories by using different maildirs --- or any other way. What matters to me is how it lets me work with the mail. > And of course, you can always manually edit both incoming and > outgoing messages, to add custom headers to them, to make it easier > for various programs to automatically sort them for you, either > before or after you've seen them. But that is very tedious --- and I don't want to edit mail I have received. It's like faking it. > Your requirement to keep mail in your inbox until you've decided what > to do with it is artificial and self-imposed; Yes, you could describe it like that. It's how I'm doing it since I'm using mutt, 10 years or more. It's a way that has developed and been used over a long time, and I would like to have a better way. But this way is as much a result of what options/ways mutt offers its users as it is a result of what I made of it. I've been using other MUAs and came to other ways with them, but having mail in the inbox until I have decided what to finally do with it is something I always did. That's one of the things the inbox is for. > if you move the mail and leave it marked new, Mutt will cheerfully
multipart/alternative question
I have my alternative_order set to text/plain text/html. All works as expected. However I have some people who use a mailer (Apple Mail) that send multipart/alternative messages with attachments. So the two parts of the message are a text/plain and a multipart/mixed. The multipart/mixed consists of said file attachment and a text/html part. Since mutt is set to prefer text/plain, all I see is the plain text message, with no indication that there is an attachment (or even an html part). I don't know if this is normal behavior for multipart/alternative messages with attachments, or a quirk of Apple Mail. I would have thought that the text/plain and text/html part of the messages should make up the multi/alt part, with other file attachments living at the same level as the multi/alt part, not buried in *one* of the alternative components So, what is the best way to deal with this? Is there anyway to just prefer the text/plain but look for attachments in the text/html branch? Or have an indication that there is a text/html branch onscreen so I know to look there? Or is the only route to set my alternative_order to prefer text/html first... Thanks
Re: split display?
On Wed 15, Jul'09 at 10:46 PM -0400, Tim Gray wrote: I'm going to pipe in as a mutt newbie, but yes: color index yellow default ~P should color all messages from you red. Or yellow as the case may be.
Re: split display?
On Wed 15, Jul'09 at 8:23 PM -0600, lee wrote: Is there a way to make the sent mails easier to distinguish from the received ones, like giving them a different color in the list? If there is, I could try storing them in the inbox. However, the only purpose of that would be to make it easier to later move them into the final storage together with the recieved mails. I'm going to pipe in as a mutt newbie, but yes: color index yellow default ~P should color all messages from you red. Also, if a thread breaks (or is inappropriate extended) you can make use of mutt's break-thread and link-thread commands.
Re: split display?
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 03:39:06PM -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > >> http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/mutt/#x-label > > > > Yeah ... This patch might be very helpful, but I wonder how the > > messages get those labels. When you have the patch, can you edit the > > label with mutt and then use it to limit the display? > > Precisely. You can already limit the display to just what's in an > X-Label header (using ~y). That patch allows you to edit labels from > within mutt, though technically you could play macro games with > $editor in order to get a similar effect. That sounds very good! I'll have to try that. > > It still wouldn't solve the problem of keeping a conversation > > together, i. e. sent mail together with received mail, preferably > > displayed as a thread. Without categories, there's probably no way > > to solve that. > > What? I do that all the time. What's wrong with keeping sent mail in > the same place as incoming mail? It would mess up the inbox even more. There isn't any concept (I know of) of "keeping mails together" other than threading and using different maildirs. Threading eventually breaks when people use different addresses or sometimes change them and when their MUAs screw up or don't have the references. Is there a way to make the sent mails easier to distinguish from the received ones, like giving them a different color in the list? If there is, I could try storing them in the inbox. However, the only purpose of that would be to make it easier to later move them into the final storage together with the recieved mails.
Re: xemacs qyestion
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 09:12:24AM +0200, Joost Kremers wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:54:04AM -0600, lee wrote:
> > (setq auto-mode-alist
> > (append
> >'(("/tmp/mutt-cat-.*" . post-mode))
> >auto-mode-alist))
>
> you could also do:
>
> (add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("mutt-cat-.*" . post-mode))
Yeah --- but as long as it works, I better don't change it :)
> > How do I make it so that flyspell-mode is also turned on
> > automatically?
>
> by putting it in a hook that is run when post-mode is run. normally, a major
> mode will have such a hook, simply called -hook, i.e. in the case
> of
> post-mode it should be post-mode-hook. so:
>
> (add-hook 'post-mode-hook 'turn-on-flyspell)
>
> should *probably* do it. (but check the documentation for flyspell-mode to
> find
> out what the best way is to turn it on. i don't use it so i don't know...)
It doesn't work. Unfortunately, I couldn't find documentation about
flyspell-mode yet. And I don't know what the "hooks" do. There is some
documentation, like about elisp, but what I haven't found is a
documentation that would explain things like that so that one could
learn how to program emacs.
Maybe it's not working because I'm using xemacs, and I'm starting
gnuclient from within mutt to edit mails.
> > I'm guessing that the flyspell-mode is not a mode despite it appears
> > to be one,
>
> it is, it's just not a major mode but a minor mode.
>
> > which probably is why I can't make it turn on
> > automatically. And if it's not a mode, it shouldn't be called mode.
>
> you haven't described what you've tried to do to turn it on, so no-one can say
> what you might have done wrong...
Well, I just tried things to get it to work, it doesn't really matter
why they didn't. But one thing I tried was to append flyspell-mode to
auto-mode-alist just like post-mode:
(setq auto-mode-alist
(append
'(("/tmp/mutt-cat-.*" . post-mode))
auto-mode-alist))
(setq auto-mode-alist
(append
'(("/tmp/mutt-cat-.*" . flyspell-mode))
auto-mode-alist))
and some variations of
(setq auto-mode-alist
(append
'(("/tmp/mutt-cat-.*" . (post-mode flyspell-mode)))
auto-mode-alist))
That's logical and should work, but it doesn't. I googled and found
some examples where flyspell-mode was turned on automatically and
tried some of them, to no avail. Some used (flyspell-mode 1), others
seemed to make up functions to turn it on, and there were some that
used hooks.
> (BTW, i think your question would be better asked on an emacs news group or
> mailing list.)
You're right --- but I didn't want to subsribe to another mailing list
or forum to ask only one simple question, and since there are users
here using emacs as editor for mutt like I do, they might know how to
do it, and it might be of use to those who don't --- and thus not too
badly misplaced here. But maybe it turns out to be a very difficult
question?
Re: split display?
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 02:01:57PM -0600, lee wrote: > I would need to know exactly which pattern will show only those > messages I want to see, and all of them. I don't know such patterns. I > might have an idea of what I could search for, but it only means that > I eventually have to spend a lot of time searching and trying to > figure out search patterns. So, in other words, you would need to manually mark the message as belonging to a category. You would need to take action to associate the message with a category. So, what's the problem with just moving the mail to a category-specific mail folder, exactly? As far as I can see, what you're trying to accomplish is exactly why mail clients have the ability to handle mail in multiple mail folders: When you receive a message that you think belongs in a particular category, move (or copy!) it into a mail folder associated with that category. Better yet, let a filtering program like procmail do it for you. You could probably even do something funky like rig up a macro to change the list of mailboxes to which mutt pays attention to just those associated with categories, and then rig up a second one to change them back to "normal" mode. Mutt has folder hooks and other interesting mechanisms to make sure that if you want, sent mail can be saved to the same category-specific folder, etc.. And of course, you can always manually edit both incoming and outgoing messages, to add custom headers to them, to make it easier for various programs to automatically sort them for you, either before or after you've seen them. Your requirement to keep mail in your inbox until you've decided what to do with it is artificial and self-imposed; if you move the mail and leave it marked new, Mutt will cheerfully remind you that you need to address it by prompting you to change folder to the next listed mailbox with new mail in it. Your insistance on keeping it in your inbox may very well be getting in your way. I suspect no mail client has implemented a scheme like what you describe because the problem is rather well-solved by multiple mail folders, and what you describe is, while perhaps interesting, also a lot more complicated, for no clear benefit of substance. The one thing you suggested that sounds the most interesting to me is the idea of having your index view contain all your messages, grouped by category. In this case, that would mean displaying all messages in your mailboxes, grouped by mailbox. Personally, I don't think I would want that... but it's an interesting idea. Unless you kept the first several folders very empty, you would rarely ever see any mail except that in the first "category" (i.e. mail folder). So I still have doubts that such a feature would be practical or useful, but it's an interesting idea. -- Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience. pgp1qvLKKfCoZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: split display?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 >> http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/mutt/#x-label > > Yeah ... This patch might be very helpful, but I wonder how the > messages get those labels. When you have the patch, can you edit the > label with mutt and then use it to limit the display? Precisely. You can already limit the display to just what's in an X-Label header (using ~y). That patch allows you to edit labels from within mutt, though technically you could play macro games with $editor in order to get a similar effect. > It still wouldn't solve the problem of keeping a conversation > together, i. e. sent mail together with received mail, preferably > displayed as a thread. Without categories, there's probably no way > to solve that. What? I do that all the time. What's wrong with keeping sent mail in the same place as incoming mail? ~Kyle - -- A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign that you're missing something. -- Unknown -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJKXj5pAAoJECuveozR/AWeMiMP/iGJbwEyx++i0f46lex6jabr EI0kMeAMvb4JyZd/U/zi7ybydcse/NgcS8Q0z7uwPjRBSix1cAOfw+Jd/Q+CNq++ /B1YcvjZ7MANAnsg5ZUFEy9yRNTDp4YD1pPOdB0JEnhgcrll2EM6OONaRTyMZpDi KBc7kRCAJms9XBChD+zPsR9DD4OOu6zSjKm2+QbZRD4ujme/ne/sjPWZ18LCkihk /SkKsGFw1kfzxboO2+D1rJ9EDO0fC/1PFejxS+tIL9b2t0oZ3C9rXxya/atHN8EU xPN8Lu5HFTJJ0CbpP3HnszzQiNRbEJMGARQfa3+GMVGGzV8fUQhjVvQ5/OBAYDCb xJaazROotAsGO3F2i+r2Yrn60YggKTc5mF079b0LVwGfp1wzLVYXv3CiVxaD4VEG YjcTn9LW6DE+WrrvP9dayO+IqIu70Ys1+d8savRybvkewD/Ssn+a5ldT2i/MeLKe YxhyhKrFkrh/Y9noro1YgpNyIZWVrjKA7Zu1+GsNA2gMCZerXpzEx2Ja+S9gx6Xz axP1FWeJprOr6epX3043S6ZHdFGAATUPEx78OGEH0QYqnl4TX6WEOOQcIH7V nbNMtujNXroiyu1BbCnzVTxa3UstyvweKpvFUtkRZY8b3NLmvdCp+vX4RElhhkLL yNwDMTWHDbHpZvSLqRdm =gPya -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: putting current entry at the top of the screen/window
Hi, You can put something like this (to emulate vim) in your .muttrc file: bind index z\n current-top -- Mun On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:56 PM PDT, Michael Tatge wrote: MT> MT> MT> * On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 11:16AM -0700 mala...@us.ibm.com (mala...@us.ibm.com) muttered: MT> > Is is possible to put the current mail entry at the top of my screen in MT> > mutt? Looking for something like "z" command in VIM. MT> MT> not exactly what you're looking for. MT> MT> HTH, MT> MT> Michael MT> -- MT> The computer is to the information industry roughly what the MT> central power station is to the electrical industry. MT> -- Peter Drucker MT> MT> PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC1A44DD MT> Jabber: init...@amessage.de
Re: split display?
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:37:12PM +0200, Christian Ebert wrote: > > I still think http://www.mutt.org/doc/devel/manual.html#patterns > covers a lot of what you want. Or you have to explain more > clearly in what way your "categories" differ from a limiting > pattern. Thanks, I'll check that out. I think there are some important differences between search patterns and categories: I would need to know exactly which pattern will show only those messages I want to see, and all of them. I don't know such patterns. I might have an idea of what I could search for, but it only means that I eventually have to spend a lot of time searching and trying to figure out search patterns. I would have to keep figuring out search patterns and categorizing the same messages over and over again by means of search patterns each time I want to work with any. I take it you can have only one pattern in use to limit the display because mutt doesn't have a way to display mail going by which of the search patterns apply to it. Categories are not volatile like search patterns are. They are there when I need them and when I don't. My inbox isn't messed up anymore with all kinds of different mail because the mails are sorted into categories. > Once you're done you can tag those messages with the same pattern > and move them to their final storage. But they need to remain in the inbox until I'm done with them. > >> This discussion about Sup on mutt-dev might be worth a look. > > Forgot the link: http://marc.info/?t=12468561561&r=1&w=2 > > The thread also mentions the X-Label patch: > > http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/mutt/#x-label Yeah ... This patch might be very helpful, but I wonder how the messages get those labels. When you have the patch, can you edit the label with mutt and then use it to limit the display? If you can edit the labels, I could use it to create categories. But having to edit all the labels instead of just assigning an existing label to a mail (as another way of assigning a mail to a category) would still be inconvenient and prone to errors (mistype a label, and you never find that mail again). It still wouldn't solve the problem of keeping a conversation together, i. e. sent mail together with received mail, preferably displayed as a thread. Without categories, there's probably no way to solve that. > But! If you want to search *across* mailboxes (sorry if I didn't > entirely grasp your example) I would use mairix, also mentioned > in above thread. Yeah, I tried mairix a while ago when I wanted to find a particular information that I knew would be stored in a mail somewhere. It worked, but it's rare that I do that. Once a message is out of the inbox, I usually don't need to dig it up again. But if mails would keep the information to which categories they once belonged, it wouldn't matter at all in which maildir they are stored as long as this feature is available. Mutt would need to keep a list of categories that aren't in use anymore, or have to be able to recreate such categories from information stored in the mail. Once you found the category, you can have all mail displayed that ever belonged to the category, and you would eventually even get references to other categories. Forget mairix --- you can be lucky when you can think of the right search pattern, and even if you get results, you never know if there is another mail with exactly the information you were looking for, but it wasn't found because you'd have to use a different pattern. Searching for mail with patterns isn't very useful. MUAs should be able to do much better than that. > > Anyway, what is sup? Another MUA? > > Yes: http://sup.rubyforge.org/ I'll try it out on a copy of my mails. What I don't like about it is that they are using some libraries that aren't maintained anymore, and they already seem to have bugs coming up because of that. That doesn't speak for the reliability of sup.
Re: putting current entry at the top of the screen/window
* On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 11:16AM -0700 mala...@us.ibm.com (mala...@us.ibm.com) muttered: > Is is possible to put the current mail entry at the top of my screen in > mutt? Looking for something like "z" command in VIM. not exactly what you're looking for. HTH, Michael -- The computer is to the information industry roughly what the central power station is to the electrical industry. -- Peter Drucker PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC1A44DD Jabber: init...@amessage.de
admin question
hi, sorry for off topic post... could someone tell what is the contact for the moderator/admin of this list. thanks
putting current entry at the top of the screen/window
Is is possible to put the current mail entry at the top of my screen in mutt? Looking for something like "z" command in VIM. This essentially requires mutt to redraw, cursor line to the top of the window. --Malahal.
Re: split display?
* lee on Wednesday, July 15, 2009 at 02:25:13 -0600 > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 07:33:51AM +0200, Christian Ebert wrote: >> * lee on Tuesday, July 14, 2009 at 00:31:17 -0600 >>> or is there a way to assign mails to categories and fold these >>> categories? >> >> Have you tried how far you can get with the command? And >> possibly a few macros with customized patterns? > > No --- I looked it up in the documentation, but I couldn't find much > about that. It seems that the display of messages can be limited to > messages matching a pattern. If that is what it does, it's not what > I'm looking for because I wouldn't be assigning messages to categories > by patterns (i. e. regexp or string search). If you already have a given category, how would be saving or copying the message to a folder more work? Once you're done with the folder, you move the messages to their final storage. If on the other hand, you want to create a category on the fly this would still be some kind of pattern, the selection/folding criterion, and, as this mail, somehow text based. So what is better fitted for that than regex plus mutt's advanced message matching patterns? > Catagories would be something I want to create or remove on the fly, > eventually with sub-categories, and I would put messages into them > depending on a particular topic, depending on particular senders, > depending on age, depending on if I need or want to do something with > the message later. And I think I would (want to) end up seeing a list of > my categories on the bottom (or top) of the list of new mail or mail that > hasn't been put into a category yet. When checking my mail, I'd go > through the new mail and move it into the appropriate category. > > In a way, it is very much like what could be done by creating maildirs > to use as such categories. The problem is that once a mail has been > moved out of the inbox into another maildir, it is out of sight. I > would also find it awkward having to switch from one maildir to > another all the time or to switch back and force between N maildirs > and the inbox. Besides, I do have a lot of maildirs already, many more > than I would want to have categories. > > With categories, I could stay within the inbox and simply move the > marker onto a category, unfold the category, work with the mail in > that category and then proceed to the next one or continue with the > new mail or whatever. After some time, I would be done with the mail > in a category and only then move the mails to another maildir for > final storage or delete them. I would also like to have the mail I'm > sending automatically assigned to the category (or to a subcategory of > it) I'm currently working with: As it is now, all mail I sent is > stored in the sent folder, and I have to go through all that from time > to time and sort it out and move the sent mail into the correct > maildir. > > It's all about having a better way to organize the mail and make > handling it much easier. I don't know any MUA that could do that; it's > outright amazing that they can't. And it's not something that could be > done with some pattern matching and limiting the display to mail that > matches a pattern ... > >>> What I want to see as overview of my inbox is something like a number >>> of categories and the number of new messages in each category. I would >>> like to have the mails automatically sorted into categories by >>> criteria like "spam score > X" or sender, and I would like to be able >>> to create new categories and assign messages to them without having to >>> edit my ~/.muttrc. >> >> Not automatically. If I knew the the categories in advance I'd >> probably use the MDA (procmail etc.) for it. > > Yeah, I'm doing that already, like for mailing lists. But I don't want > to keep editing the .forward file all the time, and that can basically > only do some pattern matching. That is very useful for a number of > things, but I'm looking for more than that. > >> But with (bound to "l" by default) and mutt's pattern >> matching you can do a lot on the fly, e.g. viewing all messages >> by you is just a matter of typing: >> >> l~P >> >> View all messages from configured mailing lists: >> >> l~L >> >> etc. > > Ok, since I don't really understand yet what can do, I'll give > you an example: I've recently been gathering information about SATA > controller cards. In the process, I eventually sent mail to > manufacturers and some computer stores around here and eventually got > some answers. It might take a year or longer before I actually buy > such a controller, or I might never buy one. But maybe I'll buy one > next week. Now I could sort the answers I received and the mails I > sent into my "basic storage structure" --- they would end up in > =Com/done somewhere between all the other mails resting there in final > storage. The oldest mail in that particular storage is from Thu, 14 > Dec 2000 --- an answer from Matrox to a question about one of
Re: split display?
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 07:33:51AM +0200, Christian Ebert wrote: > * lee on Tuesday, July 14, 2009 at 00:31:17 -0600 > > is it possible to somehow create a display that is split up in some > > way, > > Not that I know of. If I were interested in it I would probably > use GNU screen, split the screen and invoke 2 intances of mutt. > (Hardly what you're looking for, I know) Yeah, running several instances of mutt wouldn't get me close to what I want. > > or is there a way to assign mails to categories and fold these > > categories? > > Have you tried how far you can get with the command? And > possibly a few macros with customized patterns? No --- I looked it up in the documentation, but I couldn't find much about that. It seems that the display of messages can be limited to messages matching a pattern. If that is what it does, it's not what I'm looking for because I wouldn't be assigning messages to categories by patterns (i. e. regexp or string search). Catagories would be something I want to create or remove on the fly, eventually with sub-categories, and I would put messages into them depending on a particular topic, depending on particular senders, depending on age, depending on if I need or want to do something with the message later. And I think I would (want to) end up seeing a list of my categories on the bottom (or top) of the list of new mail or mail that hasn't been put into a category yet. When checking my mail, I'd go through the new mail and move it into the appropriate category. In a way, it is very much like what could be done by creating maildirs to use as such categories. The problem is that once a mail has been moved out of the inbox into another maildir, it is out of sight. I would also find it awkward having to switch from one maildir to another all the time or to switch back and force between N maildirs and the inbox. Besides, I do have a lot of maildirs already, many more than I would want to have categories. With categories, I could stay within the inbox and simply move the marker onto a category, unfold the category, work with the mail in that category and then proceed to the next one or continue with the new mail or whatever. After some time, I would be done with the mail in a category and only then move the mails to another maildir for final storage or delete them. I would also like to have the mail I'm sending automatically assigned to the category (or to a subcategory of it) I'm currently working with: As it is now, all mail I sent is stored in the sent folder, and I have to go through all that from time to time and sort it out and move the sent mail into the correct maildir. It's all about having a better way to organize the mail and make handling it much easier. I don't know any MUA that could do that; it's outright amazing that they can't. And it's not something that could be done with some pattern matching and limiting the display to mail that matches a pattern ... > > What I want to see as overview of my inbox is something like a number > > of categories and the number of new messages in each category. I would > > like to have the mails automatically sorted into categories by > > criteria like "spam score > X" or sender, and I would like to be able > > to create new categories and assign messages to them without having to > > edit my ~/.muttrc. > > Not automatically. If I knew the the categories in advance I'd > probably use the MDA (procmail etc.) for it. Yeah, I'm doing that already, like for mailing lists. But I don't want to keep editing the .forward file all the time, and that can basically only do some pattern matching. That is very useful for a number of things, but I'm looking for more than that. > But with (bound to "l" by default) and mutt's pattern > matching you can do a lot on the fly, e.g. viewing all messages > by you is just a matter of typing: > > l~P > > View all messages from configured mailing lists: > > l~L > > etc. Ok, since I don't really understand yet what can do, I'll give you an example: I've recently been gathering information about SATA controller cards. In the process, I eventually sent mail to manufacturers and some computer stores around here and eventually got some answers. It might take a year or longer before I actually buy such a controller, or I might never buy one. But maybe I'll buy one next week. Now I could sort the answers I received and the mails I sent into my "basic storage structure" --- they would end up in =Com/done somewhere between all the other mails resting there in final storage. The oldest mail in that particular storage is from Thu, 14 Dec 2000 --- an answer from Matrox to a question about one of their graphics cards. I also have an answer to a request about something else from Tue, 27 Jan 2009. It's still in my inbox because I didn't want to move it into a final storage folder where the information would become hard to find in a year or two when I might refer to it. The answers about SATA controlle
Re: xemacs qyestion
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:54:04AM -0600, lee wrote:
> (setq auto-mode-alist
> (append
>'(("/tmp/mutt-cat-.*" . post-mode))
>auto-mode-alist))
you could also do:
(add-to-list 'auto-mode-alist '("mutt-cat-.*" . post-mode))
> in init.el for xemacs to automaticaly turn on the post-mode when
> writing mails with mutt.
>
> How do I make it so that flyspell-mode is also turned on
> automatically?
by putting it in a hook that is run when post-mode is run. normally, a major
mode will have such a hook, simply called -hook, i.e. in the case of
post-mode it should be post-mode-hook. so:
(add-hook 'post-mode-hook 'turn-on-flyspell)
should *probably* do it. (but check the documentation for flyspell-mode to find
out what the best way is to turn it on. i don't use it so i don't know...)
> I'm guessing that the flyspell-mode is not a mode despite it appears
> to be one,
it is, it's just not a major mode but a minor mode.
> which probably is why I can't make it turn on
> automatically. And if it's not a mode, it shouldn't be called mode.
you haven't described what you've tried to do to turn it on, so no-one can say
what you might have done wrong...
(BTW, i think your question would be better asked on an emacs news group or
mailing list.)
HTH
--
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments
