Hi Dmitry,
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 01:33, Dmitry Kurochkin
wrote:
> I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> something obvious. ?But why can't we render HTML parts in replies the
> same way we do in notmuch-show (using `mm-display-part')? ?That should
> not introduce a
Hi Dmitry,
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 01:33, Dmitry Kurochkin
wrote:
> I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> something obvious. But why can't we render HTML parts in replies the
> same way we do in notmuch-show (using `mm-display-part')? That should
> not introduce a
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:07:40 +, David Edmondson wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:33:58 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin gmail.com> wrote:
> > I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> > something obvious. But why can't we render HTML parts in replies the
> > same way we do in
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:36:07 +0200, Tomi Ollila wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:07:40 +, David Edmondson wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:33:58 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin > gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> > > something obvious. But w
Hi Adam.
On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 19:10:48 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for the review. Most of the things you've suggested are easy
> changes, and I think obvious improvements, so I'll change them for the
> next version. A bit of discussion on the more involved things belo
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:33:58 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> something obvious. But why can't we render HTML parts in replies the
> same way we do in notmuch-show (using `mm-display-part')? That should
> not introduce a w3m.el
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:36:07 +0200, Tomi Ollila wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:07:40 +, David Edmondson wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:33:58 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
> > wrote:
> > > I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> > > something obvious. But why can't
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:07:40 +, David Edmondson wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:33:58 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
> wrote:
> > I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> > something obvious. But why can't we render HTML parts in replies the
> > same way we do in notmuch
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:33:58 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
wrote:
> I did not follow the rest of the discussion, so sorry if I missed
> something obvious. But why can't we render HTML parts in replies the
> same way we do in notmuch-show (using `mm-display-part')? That should
> not introduce a w3m.el
Hi Adam.
On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 19:10:48 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for the review. Most of the things you've suggested are easy
> changes, and I think obvious improvements, so I'll change them for the
> next version. A bit of discussion on the more involved things belo
Hi David,
Thanks for the review. Most of the things you've suggested are easy
changes, and I think obvious improvements, so I'll change them for the
next version. A bit of discussion on the more involved things below:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 01:50, David Edmondson wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 0
On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 19:10:48 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon wrote:
> > Using w3m means that you should `require' it. What happens when a user
> > doesn't have it? (Either the elisp or the command.)
>
> This was my initial thought, but when I looked at notmuch-show.el,
> which uses w3m features, I notice
On Mon, 9 Jan 2012 19:10:48 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon wrote:
> > Using w3m means that you should `require' it. What happens when a user
> > doesn't have it? (Either the elisp or the command.)
>
> This was my initial thought, but when I looked at notmuch-show.el,
> which uses w3m features, I notice
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 18:27, Aaron Ecay wrote:
>> +(defun w3m-region (start end)) ;; From `w3m.el'.
>
> What is the purpose of the above line? If it is to make the compiler
> aware of the function, you should use ‘declare-function’ instead. Defun
> will erase the original definition of the w3m-
Hi David,
Thanks for the review. Most of the things you've suggested are easy
changes, and I think obvious improvements, so I'll change them for the
next version. A bit of discussion on the more involved things below:
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 01:50, David Edmondson wrote:
> On Sun, ?8 Jan 2012 0
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 18:27, Aaron Ecay wrote:
>> +(defun w3m-region (start end)) ;; From `w3m.el'.
>
> What is the purpose of the above line? ?If it is to make the compiler
> aware of the function, you should use ?declare-function? instead. ?Defun
> will erase the original definition of the w3m-
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 00:52:42 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon
wrote:
> +(defun w3m-region (start end)) ;; From `w3m.el'.
> +(defun notmuch-mua-quote-part (part)
> + (with-temp-buffer
> +(insert part)
> +(message-mode)
> +(fill-region (point-min) (point-max))
> +(goto-char (point-min))
>
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 00:52:42 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon
wrote:
> +(defun w3m-region (start end)) ;; From `w3m.el'.
> +(defun notmuch-mua-quote-part (part)
> + (with-temp-buffer
> +(insert part)
> +(message-mode)
> +(fill-region (point-min) (point-max))
> +(goto-char (point-min))
>
Adam,
One comment below.
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 00:52:42 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon
wrote:
> From: Adam Wolfe Gordon
>
> Using the new JSON reply format allows emacs to quote HTML parts
> nicely by first parsing them with w3m, then quoting them. This is
> very useful for users who regularly receiv
Adam,
One comment below.
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 00:52:42 -0700, Adam Wolfe Gordon
wrote:
> From: Adam Wolfe Gordon
>
> Using the new JSON reply format allows emacs to quote HTML parts
> nicely by first parsing them with w3m, then quoting them. This is
> very useful for users who regularly receiv
From: Adam Wolfe Gordon
Using the new JSON reply format allows emacs to quote HTML parts
nicely by first parsing them with w3m, then quoting them. This is
very useful for users who regularly receive HTML-only email.
The behavior for messages that contain plain text parts should be
unchanged, exc
From: Adam Wolfe Gordon
Using the new JSON reply format allows emacs to quote HTML parts
nicely by first parsing them with w3m, then quoting them. This is
very useful for users who regularly receive HTML-only email.
The behavior for messages that contain plain text parts should be
unchanged, exc
22 matches
Mail list logo
