Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
This one time, at band camp, Jeremy Blosser wrote: Not for list-reply. The important thing to make this command work is letting mutt know which mails are from lists, using the 'subscribe' and 'lists' commands. Bleargh. What a pain in the ass. Most of my mailing lists identify themselves with non-standard but commonly-used headers, and you'd think it could at least intuit a mailing list and prompt, even with the ones that don't, with a few exceptions. msg25562/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
Shawn -- ...and then Shawn McMahon said... % % This one time, at band camp, Jeremy Blosser wrote: % % Not for list-reply. The important thing to make this command work is % letting mutt know which mails are from lists, using the 'subscribe' and % 'lists' commands. % % Bleargh. What a pain in the ass. Most of my mailing lists identify Well, it gets better than that; mutt can decide what to do based on whether you're subscribed to the list or not, so you have to have both commands. % themselves with non-standard but commonly-used headers, and you'd think % it could at least intuit a mailing list and prompt, even with the ones % that don't, with a few exceptions. So, since lists are so easy to recognize, have a script that generates mailing list names from your directories and put something like subscribe `/my/cool/lists/script.pl -s` lists `/my/cool/lists/script.pl -l` into your muttrc. Post it when you get it done, too, so that the rest of us can see how easy it is; we're all slaving away with lines like subscribe mutt-users empeg ice-bucket lists gnupg-users remind-fans suse-security in our config files. :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg25564/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
This one time, at band camp, David T-G wrote: So, since lists are so easy to recognize, have a script that generates mailing list names from your directories and put something like Mailing lists aren't easy to recognize, at least when they don't put in a header, but you're forgetting that this will only come up if the user hits the list-reply key, thereby TELLING mutt that the email was from a list. That simplifies matters immensely. Does that mean you can always tell what the list address is? No, of course not. You check for header lines with post in them, and pull addresses. If there aren't any, you pop up the From: as a default, and let the user userride it like any other prompted option. This will miss a lot of lists. So only require the user to hint those in the config file, not ALL of them. Why do people assume any solution that doesn't work 100% of the time is a bad solution? Most solutions fit the most common case and try not to make any irrevocable choices in the others. msg25566/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
On Mar 15, Shawn McMahon [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Jeremy Blosser wrote: Not for list-reply. The important thing to make this command work is letting mutt know which mails are from lists, using the 'subscribe' and 'lists' commands. Bleargh. What a pain in the ass. Most of my mailing lists identify themselves with non-standard but commonly-used headers, and you'd think it could at least intuit a mailing list and prompt, even with the ones that don't, with a few exceptions. Mutt's handling of this stuff predates most of these commonly-used headers by years. Recently several people have suggested using these newer list headers to intuit mailing list addresses, but no one who cares has produced working code yet, and the rest of us seem to be following if it ain't broke, don't fix it. msg25567/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
* Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-15 09:41:11 -0500]: Mailing lists aren't easy to recognize, at least when they don't put in a header, but you're forgetting that this will only come up if the user hits the list-reply key, thereby TELLING mutt that the email was from a list. Perhaps I'm missing something here but I don't use list-reply to tell mutt that an email is from a mailing list, I use list-reply to tell mutt that I want to respond to the list it was from (instead of to the author of the email, or whatever). -- Dave Pearson: | mutt.octet.filter - autoview octet-streams http://www.davep.org/ | mutt.vcard.filter - autoview simple vcards Mutt: | muttrc2html - muttrc - HTML utility http://www.davep.org/mutt/ | muttrc.sl - Jed muttrc mode
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 02:57:36PM +, Dave Pearson wrote: * Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-15 09:41:11 -0500]: Mailing lists aren't easy to recognize, at least when they don't put in a header, but you're forgetting that this will only come up if the user hits the list-reply key, thereby TELLING mutt that the email was from a list. Perhaps I'm missing something here but I don't use list-reply to tell mutt that an email is from a mailing list, I use list-reply to tell mutt that I want to respond to the list it was from (instead of to the author of the email, or whatever). right. the question is, how does mutt know what is the list address, and what is the personal address? -- Dan Boger [EMAIL PROTECTED] msg25569/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
This one time, at band camp, Dave Pearson wrote: Perhaps I'm missing something here but I don't use list-reply to tell mutt that an email is from a mailing list, I use list-reply to tell mutt that I want to respond to the list it was from (instead of to the author of the email, or whatever). Uh huh. And we're discussing making Mutt handle that without you having to put two statements in the config file for every list you're on, just for the ones that are too hard to figure out programmatically. I maintain that a sufficient percentage of them are NOT too hard to figure out that it's worth doing. msg25570/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
Shawn -- ...and then Shawn McMahon said... % % This one time, at band camp, Dave Pearson wrote: % % Perhaps I'm missing something here but I don't use list-reply to tell mutt % that an email is from a mailing list, I use list-reply to tell mutt that I % want to respond to the list it was from (instead of to the author of the % email, or whatever). % % Uh huh. And we're discussing making Mutt handle that without you having % to put two statements in the config file for every list you're on, just % for the ones that are too hard to figure out programmatically. BTW, subscribe is a superset of lists; you'll only need one for lists on which you are and then one for lists on which you aren't. % % I maintain that a sufficient percentage of them are NOT too hard to % figure out that it's worth doing. Great. Start coding. Post the result. TIA HAND :-D -- David T-G * It's easier to fight for one's principles (play) [EMAIL PROTECTED] * than to live up to them. -- fortune cookie (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.justpickone.org/davidtg/Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg! msg25571/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
On Mar 15, Shawn McMahon [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Dave Pearson wrote: Perhaps I'm missing something here but I don't use list-reply to tell mutt that an email is from a mailing list, I use list-reply to tell mutt that I want to respond to the list it was from (instead of to the author of the email, or whatever). Uh huh. And we're discussing making Mutt handle that without you having to put two statements in the config file for every list you're on, just for the ones that are too hard to figure out programmatically. You only need one statement in the config file per list. 'subscribe' and 'lists' are two different but related commands. One is for lists you are subscribed to, the other is for lists you may see mail from/send mail to but are not actually subscribed to. Which of the two you use to tell mutt about a list determines how things like the MFT header are generated. (If you're subscribed, you don't want your address in MFT. If you're not subscribed, you do want your address in MFT.) Note that this distinction is another piece that would be missed if we just relied on the list headers. Also, FWIW, it isn't even one statement per list. You can put as many lists as you want on one line, and the entries themselves are patterns matched against the address, so one entry can match multiple lists if you write it that way. I maintain that a sufficient percentage of them are NOT too hard to figure out that it's worth doing. If you want to see this, you probably need to produce a patch that does it in a quality way. I haven't heard any of the developers interested in changing how it works now. msg25572/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
* Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-15 10:17:37 -0500]: This one time, at band camp, Dave Pearson wrote: Perhaps I'm missing something here but I don't use list-reply to tell mutt that an email is from a mailing list, I use list-reply to tell mutt that I want to respond to the list it was from (instead of to the author of the email, or whatever). Uh huh. And we're discussing making Mutt handle that without you having to put two statements in the config file for every list you're on, just for the ones that are too hard to figure out programmatically. Ok, I see. My apologies, I'd not quite seen that twist (or, rather, I had but had got the wrong end of the stick). I've seen people complain, elsewhere, about having to maintain their lists and subscribe lists. Personally I've not really had much of a problem with it. What sorts of problems do people encounter in this regard? All I've ever been told so far is it's a hassle. I maintain that a sufficient percentage of them are NOT too hard to figure out that it's worth doing. mutt needs a built-in lisp interpreter. ; -- Dave Pearson: | mutt.octet.filter - autoview octet-streams http://www.davep.org/ | mutt.vcard.filter - autoview simple vcards Mutt: | muttrc2html - muttrc - HTML utility http://www.davep.org/mutt/ | muttrc.sl - Jed muttrc mode
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
This one time, at band camp, David T-G wrote: BTW, subscribe is a superset of lists; you'll only need one for lists on which you are and then one for lists on which you aren't. Yeah, figured that one out after I posted. :-) Great. Start coding. Post the result. TIA HAND Trust me, you do NOT want my code handling your mail. :-) However, if mutt's authors don't take user requests, that's fine, I'll stop giving feedback. msg25574/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
This one time, at band camp, David Champion wrote: Personally, I don't like the idea of hard-coding mutt to recognize mailing lists according to commonly-observed trends that aren't specified by a reasonably standard standard. There are many ways to identify a mailing list. Mutt shouldn't need to be trained and maintained to know the latest ones. Ok, but how about the two that are RFCs? msg25586/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
* On 2002.03.15, in [EMAIL PROTECTED], * Shawn McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, David Champion wrote: Personally, I don't like the idea of hard-coding mutt to recognize mailing lists according to commonly-observed trends that aren't specified by a reasonably standard standard. There are many ways to identify a mailing list. Mutt shouldn't need to be trained and maintained to know the latest ones. Ok, but how about the two that are RFCs? Are you asking me, or speaking rhetorically? I'd deal with them the same way. If you're really trying to make a request of the development team, you should write to mutt-dev or use the provided program for making feature requests. All you're doing here is griping. If you're lucky, someone will take up your cause and create a patch, but if you honestly want to treat this as a formal feature request, you're better off making a formal feature request. See mutt(1) or flea(1). -- -D.[EMAIL PROTECTED]NSITUniversity of Chicago
Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
* Simon White [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-14 12:51]: 14-Mar-02 at 12:39, Sven Guckes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote / schreibt : now, if crontab does all this then you probably have to use /dir/mutt. You telepathic fiend you. (idiomatic word order, for your English notes Sven) *grin* Mail-Followup-To: Simon White [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mutt User List [EMAIL PROTECTED] this is a closed list, isn't it? Don't follow... what am I doing wrong? well, you have to be subscribed to the list to be able to send to it. so I know that when I reply to the list you'll get a copy. So this Mail-Followup-To seems redundant. Sven
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
* Sven Guckes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-14 13:55:59 +0100]: * Simon White [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-14 12:51]: Don't follow... what am I doing wrong? well, you have to be subscribed to the list to be able to send to it. so I know that when I reply to the list you'll get a copy. So this Mail-Followup-To seems redundant. Could it not be the case that the personal entry in Mail-Followup-To might be pointing to an address with which the author isn't subscribed to the list? This might be an address they monitor all day whereas their mutt subscription might be connected with a less read mailbox somewhere else. The personal followup would alert the author that someone has made a response to an email they've authored. -- Dave Pearson: | mutt.octet.filter - autoview octet-streams http://www.davep.org/ | mutt.vcard.filter - autoview simple vcards Mutt: | muttrc2html - muttrc - HTML utility http://www.davep.org/mutt/ | muttrc.sl - Jed muttrc mode
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
* Dave Pearson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-14 14:14]: So this Mail-Followup-To seems redundant [on a closed list] Could it not be the case that the personal entry in Mail-Followup-To might be pointing to an address with which the author isn't subscribed to the list? This might be an address they monitor all day whereas their mutt subscription might be connected with a less read mailbox somewhere else. The personal followup would alert the author that someone has made a response to an email they've authored. oh - you mean, this Mail-Followup-To is for extra notification? Let's see... Mail-Followup-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (but only for German text); [EMAIL PROTECTED] (if it's about Vim, too), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (to summon my evil ghost), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (when I seem to have gone underground), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (for when I'm at unversity), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (not for Windows lusers), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (just a spam trap), (and in emergencies call my mum at TEL +49-30-112) My point: If you want notification at other addresses then you can use a filter at your home site. Or you can subscribe to the list with some other address, too. But there is *no* reason to redirect CCs in any form which could be obsolete the very next day. Now, this Mail-Followup-To: needs to be put to better use than creating more problems. Sven
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
* Sven Guckes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-03-14 15:26:01 +0100]: oh - you mean, this Mail-Followup-To is for extra notification? Please actually read what I write. I mean it could be one use for someone. You asked a question, I provided one possible answer. Once again it seems that such a question is really an attempt at trolling for arguments sigh. Seriously Sven, try assuming that there's more than one way to do things and that methods other than the one you prefer might also be reasonable. Also try reading what people write, not what you'd like them to write so you can start to try and hold them responsible for your inventions. I'm sure you're able. If you want notification at other addresses then you can use a filter at your home site. If it's feasible (and, in most cases, why wouldn't it be?) then, yes, that's another way of doing things. Where exactly did I say the possible answer I provided was the only way of doing things? Or you can subscribe to the list with some other address, too. Can't you see how that wouldn't work? Or, more to the point, how you'd be back where you started. But there is *no* reason to redirect CCs in any form which could be obsolete the very next day. Eh? Now, this Mail-Followup-To: needs to be put to better use than creating more problems. What problems? -- Dave Pearson: | mutt.octet.filter - autoview octet-streams http://www.davep.org/ | mutt.vcard.filter - autoview simple vcards Mutt: | muttrc2html - muttrc - HTML utility http://www.davep.org/mutt/ | muttrc.sl - Jed muttrc mode
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
This one time, at band camp, Simon White wrote: Ahh yes there is. L (list-reply). Or whatever you map it to in your muttrcs. Cool. Except it doesn't work with any mailing list I've tried. Including, for example, this one... msg25508/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 12:20:06PM -0500, Shawn McMahon wrote: This one time, at band camp, Simon White wrote: Ahh yes there is. L (list-reply). Or whatever you map it to in your muttrcs. Cool. Except it doesn't work with any mailing list I've tried. Including, for example, this one... I believe you need to tell mutt which addresses are lists - look at the lists and subscribe keywords, in the mutt docs. HTH! -- Dan Boger Linux MVP brainbench.com msg25509/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Mail-Followup-To on mutt-users redundant?
14-Mar-02 at 12:20, Shawn McMahon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : This one time, at band camp, Simon White wrote: Ahh yes there is. L (list-reply). Or whatever you map it to in your muttrcs. Cool. Except it doesn't work with any mailing list I've tried. I just hit SHIFT-L and this resulted: a reply to the Mailing list only. I notice you're running 1.2.5.1i whereas I have 1.3.27 which makes a big difference, no doubt. -- John Lennon:--v [Simon White. vim/mutt/Linux. [EMAIL PROTECTED] GIMPS: 40.12%] Sometimes we sit and read other people's interpretations of our lyrics and think, 'Hey, that's pretty good.' If we liked it, we would keep our mouths shut and just accept the credit as if it was what we meant all along.
