Re: procmail (was: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments)

2016-10-24 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 11:42:16AM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 09:55:02PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > > > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > Yes, of course, because procmail inserted a ">" just in front of the > > > > "From " line in the

Re: procmail (was: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments)

2016-10-24 Thread Pavel Sanda
Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 09:55:02PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > Yes, of course, because procmail inserted a ">" just in front of the > > > "From " line in the attachment (which I do manually). > > > > > > Care to share the

Re: procmail (was: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments)

2016-10-23 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 09:55:02PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > Yes, of course, because procmail inserted a ">" just in front of the > > "From " line in the attachment (which I do manually). > > > > Care to share the corresponding config line(s) for procmail? > >

procmail (was: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments)

2016-10-22 Thread Pavel Sanda
Enrico Forestieri wrote: > Yes, of course, because procmail inserted a ">" just in front of the > "From " line in the attachment (which I do manually). > > Care to share the corresponding config line(s) for procmail? Hmm, nothing special: :0 *List-Post:

please change subject line (was: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments)

2016-10-21 Thread Guenter Milde
As a courtesy to the list members interested in Return + Return but not mailbox problems, could you please use a more telling subject line? Thanks, Günter

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-20 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 04:07:13PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 05:30:20PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:09:53PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Funny thing is that my

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-20 Thread Pavel Sanda
Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 05:30:20PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:09:53PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > > > > > > Funny thing is that my mutt read the previous message without doing > > > > what you describe...

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-20 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 05:30:20PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:09:53PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > > > > Funny thing is that my mutt read the previous message without doing > > > what you describe... > > > > I guess you are using the

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-20 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 03:12:50PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > I have searched a bit, and the only thing I have found (with my MUA > Thunderbird) > is to change _all_ my attachments to be base64. I'll try that, because I > prefer to have you with me than against me ;), but I may have

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-20 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:50:06PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 04:12:54PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 07:03:32PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > > > This is because mutt takes them to be separate emails placed somewhere > > > else

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-20 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 19/10/2016 à 19:37, Richard Heck a écrit : Yes, good for both. It will get much more testing in stable, and we are presumably some ways from 2.2.3. Thanks, I did that. JMarc

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-20 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 19/10/2016 à 19:03, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:20:51PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Thanks, it seems to work well. Here is the combo commit, for reference. Jean-Marc, please, can you use some kind of encoding (base64, quoted-printable or whatever) when

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Pavel Sanda
Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:09:53PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > > Funny thing is that my mutt read the previous message without doing > > what you describe... > > I guess you are using the maildir format for your mailbox. mbox here. but mutt version is somewhat

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 03:09:53PM -0700, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > Funny thing is that my mutt read the previous message without doing > what you describe... I guess you are using the maildir format for your mailbox. -- Enrico

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Pavel Sanda
Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:20:51PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > Thanks, it seems to work well. Here is the combo commit, for reference. > > Jean-Marc, please, can you use some kind of encoding (base64, > quoted-printable or whatever) when attaching

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 04:12:54PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 07:03:32PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > This is because mutt takes them to be separate emails placed somewhere > > else in the list of emails and I have to search for them or edit the > > mailbox

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 07:03:32PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > This is because mutt takes them to be separate emails placed somewhere > else in the list of emails and I have to search for them or edit the > mailbox file to add a ">" just before "From" in order to actually see > them as

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Richard Heck
On 10/19/2016 12:20 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 19/10/2016 à 18:12, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : >> I had a look and it turns out that the code dealing with separator >> insets was specifically tailored to the old behaviour. If you change >> that behaviour, you should also change the

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:20:51PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Thanks, it seems to work well. Here is the combo commit, for reference. Jean-Marc, please, can you use some kind of encoding (base64, quoted-printable or whatever) when attaching patches that start with the word "From"?

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 19/10/2016 à 18:12, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : I had a look and it turns out that the code dealing with separator insets was specifically tailored to the old behaviour. If you change that behaviour, you should also change the corresponding separator code. This is what the attached patch

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 02:53:43PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 19/10/2016 à 14:30, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : > >>Tested and I think there is a minor issue. In the attached .lyx file, > >>put the cursor at the end of "hello". Press return three times. The > >>first two times show

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Enrico Forestieri
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 02:53:43PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Enrico, do you have thoughts about what we really want there? What is the > use case that we have in mind, especially when we are in a nested > environment? It does not seem to be something about nested environments. For

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 19/10/2016 à 14:30, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Tested and I think there is a minor issue. In the attached .lyx file, put the cursor at the end of "hello". Press return three times. The first two times show that the issue initially reported is fixed (because it is itemize instead of

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-19 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 14/10/2016 à 17:16, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 03:22:09PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 07/10/2016 à 03:48, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : I don't know much about layout nesting, but my first reaction is that I agree with you regarding the expected behavior. Did

Re: [PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-14 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 03:22:09PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 07/10/2016 à 03:48, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > > I don't know much about layout nesting, but my first reaction is that I > > > agree with you regarding the expected behavior. > > > > Did we figure out what the correct

[PATCH] Re: Return + Return in nested environments

2016-10-14 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 07/10/2016 à 03:48, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : I don't know much about layout nesting, but my first reaction is that I agree with you regarding the expected behavior. Did we figure out what the correct behavior for this is? Please try that and tell me whether it works for you. JMarc