Glenn Burkhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to change the default components file to include a folder copy:
>
> To:
> cc:
> Fcc: +sent-mail
> Subject:
>
Obviously it won't be a clear majority, but perhaps there will be some
consensus.
I think a Fcc out of the box is entirely
Date:Mon, 30 Jun 2003 15:39:55 -0400
From:Glenn Burkhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Should this be changed,
I have a patch to change it (somewhere, if I can find it, which I
made before I discovered that this insanity was actually documen
The addition of 'Fcc: +outbox' does seem an appropriate
and consistent default for new users that can easily be
adjusted by seasoned veterans. +1.
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 12:17:29AM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote:
> Glenn Burkhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to change the default compon
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 09:01:47 -0400
Tom Julien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The addition of 'Fcc: +outbox' does seem an appropriate and consistent
> default for new users that can easily be adjusted by seasoned
> veterans. +1.
Ooops, forgot to send my answer to the list instead of Tom:
Agreed. +1
> Bill Wohler wrote:
> I think a Fcc out of the box is entirely appropriate for new users. The
> Dcc usage that Earl suggests is a little more advanced, and is typically
> used with procmail which is even more advanced (although it is
> absolutely necessary these days). And remember that Dcc is sti
>While I use +out, I think +outbox is more MH-like than +sent-mail and
>would vote for +outbox for the default and may well edit my own
>components file accordingly now that I'm thinking of it.
"Me too" (except that I already use +outbox :-) I don't really care what
the name is, as long as it's i
Sorry to interrupt the good work thats going on with a user question,
but I can't seem to figure this one out. How do I use pick to get
messages that are in one sequence but not another, ie:
sequence a is a subset of sequence b.
I want to get the messages that are not in sequence a, something li
Date:Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:56:58 -0400
From:Scott Lipcon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| How do I use pick to get
| messages that are in one sequence but not another, ie:
| Any ideas?
Don't use pick, use mark
mark +folder -seq new -
A lot of us use the "dcc:" header field. It acts like "bcc:" does on
most other MUAs. Is there any reason not to add a paragraph about it to
the send(1) manpage?
My Linux box is down right now, so I can't check this out, but here's a
new paragraph. (I guess "Dcc:" works as well as "dcc:", wh
>Comments? Votes?
Seems reasonable to me.
--Ken
Scott Lipcon wrote:
Sorry to interrupt the good work thats going on with a user question,
but I can't seem to figure this one out. How do I use pick to get
messages that are in one sequence but not another, ie:
sequence a is a subset of sequence b.
I want to get the messages that are not in seque
Date:Tue, 01 Jul 2003 07:47:32 -0700
From:Jerry Peek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Comments? Votes?
Yes, dcc has been around long enough that it isn't about to vanish
next week... (and 2822 managed to avoid stealing that field name
for som
Date:Tue, 01 Jul 2003 07:58:39 -0700
From:Jerry Peek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| I'm not on a system with MH right now, so I can't play around to check
| it... but I think you want to use sequence-negation.
No, that doesn't work for the
Robert Elz wrote:
... I would include a sentence or two about the risks of using dcc
when really sending a bcc (as opposed to a cc to myself).
Perhaps something like
Note that the users listed in the dcc field receive no explicit
indication that others who received the message are
Hi,
> A lot of us use the "dcc:" header field. It acts like "bcc:" does on
> most other MUAs. Is there any reason not to add a paragraph about it
> to the send(1) manpage?
>
> Comments? Votes?
+1.
Perhaps mention it in the fcc description as an alternative. I found
fcc useless for my purpos
Ralph Corderoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Perhaps mention it in the fcc description as an alternative. I found
>fcc useless for my purposes; it's really handy to have the real
>message-id, etc.
Have mh set the message-id
send: -msgid
in your ".mh_profile"
-NWR
On July 1, 2003 at 00:17, Bill Wohler wrote:
> I think a Fcc out of the box is entirely appropriate for new users. The
> Dcc usage that Earl suggests is a little more advanced, and is typically
> used with procmail which is even more advanced (although it is
> absolutely necessary these days). And
On July 1, 2003 at 07:47, Jerry Peek wrote:
> A lot of us use the "dcc:" header field. It acts like "bcc:" does on
> most other MUAs. Is there any reason not to add a paragraph about it to
> the send(1) manpage?
>
> My Linux box is down right now, so I can't check this out, but here's a
> ne
On Tuesday, Jul 1, 2003, at 14:22 America/New_York, Earl Hood wrote:
After some thought, and reading the responses, I no longer have
objections to it. As for the name, it should be "outbox" (with
a lowercase 'o') since it complements the default name of "inbox"
used when incorporating new mail.
m
Earl Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Including the additional note about the dangers of using dcc.
> Personally, I use dcc when copying myself and bcc when copying
> someone else. I personally dislike the bcc behavior of other MUAs
> since they provide no indication to the receipient that they
Earl Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only potential confusion for new users about "Fcc: +outbox" is
> that when they see it the first time when composing a message, they
> may be confused on exactly what that means.
That's a good point. Here are some other issues that come to mind. In
this
Date:Tue, 01 Jul 2003 13:27:46 -0500
From:Earl Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Related comment: It may be worth considering making bcc MIME aware.
Already exists, which I am hoping that the bcc I am sending
you of this message will demonst
> Bill Wohler wrote:
> Note that in replcomps, the Fcc only appears if you specify "repl -fcc
> +outbox". But then it does appear in the header.
>
> Whatever we do should be consistent.
Jerry Peek had (privately) suggested this solution:
Fcc: %<{fcc}%{fcc}%|+outbox%>
as part of replcomps. This
On 1 July 2003 at 13:51, Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that in replcomps, the Fcc only appears if you specify "repl -fcc
> +outbox". But then it does appear in the header.
...
Here's another idea that I sent to Glenn in a private message.
I'm not saying that it's better than any
Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Earl Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The only potential confusion for new users about "Fcc: +outbox" is
>> that when they see it the first time when composing a message, they
>> may be confused on exactly what that means.
>That's a good point. Here are
Ok, I've committed changes to components, forwcomps, distcomps, replcomps,
replgroupcomps, based on the discussion. Only repl.man needed to be changed;
the other man pages dynamically pull in the current default template file
when the man page is built by 'make'.
26 matches
Mail list logo
