Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[David Edmondson]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth  wrote:
> Meanwhile, I'm aware of two regressions I'd like to see fixed before
> 0.3:
> 
>   * Reply is now splitting the window
> 
> We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
> what's the advantage of splitting here?

Patch sent.

>   * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
> order.
> 
> A minor point, but it would be nice to fix this.

Patch sent.

dme.
-- 
David Edmondson, http://dme.org

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Aneesh Kumar K. V]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth  wrote:
> I pushed hard to get most everything we wanted for 0.3 done yesterday,
> (which was one week since 0.2). I think we're still within the tolerance
> of my published "about a week" schedule, but I would like to wrap things
> up soon.
> 
> Here are the features that I still have left in my queue at this point:
> 
>   * improve from-header guessing
> 
> Dirk is looking into fixing a segfault found by the test suite here
> 
>   * Fcc, Maildir, and Emacs message-mode -- a bit of code
> 
> This is next on my list to apply. Thanks for the extra testing!
> 
> There are a few other features that people had proposed but that didn't
> pass review yet. If people follow-up with those quickly, they can still
> go in. Otherwise, there's another new merge window coming up soon!
> 
> Meanwhile, I'm aware of two regressions I'd like to see fixed before
> 0.3:
> 
>   * Reply is now splitting the window
> 
> We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
> what's the advantage of splitting here?

This actually have a disadvantage that after sending the mail i have to
explicitly kill the buffer


> 
>   * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
> order.
> 
> A minor point, but it would be nice to fix this.
> 
> Finally, any of the tweaks I suggested to notmuch-hello mode would be
> quite welcome. I might take a whack at some of these.
> 
> Then, there's the task of writing up NEWS. Dirk started helping with
> that, which I appreciate. If anyone else wants to write up descriptions
> of their favorite features that have been merged, that would be great.

Another issue i found was


* A thread with only one message doesn't show the message body by
  default. I need to use 'h' key binding to show the message
  body. Multiple message thread seems to work fine.


-aneesh

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Carl Worth]

> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth  wrote:
> >   * Reply is now splitting the window
>
> Patch sent.
> >   * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
> > order.
>
> Patch sent.

Perfect!

Both of these are pushed now.

Thanks for the quick fixes.

-Carl

-- 
carl.d.worth at intel.com
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:28:29 +0100, David Edmondson  wrote:
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Jameson Rollins]

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:51:46 +0530, "Aneesh Kumar K. V"  wrote:
> * A thread with only one message doesn't show the message body by
>   default. I need to use 'h' key binding to show the message
>   body. Multiple message thread seems to work fine.

Yeah, I've been noticing this as well.

jamie.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Jameson Rollins]

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:51:46 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K. V 
aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
 * A thread with only one message doesn't show the message body by
   default. I need to use 'h' key binding to show the message
   body. Multiple message thread seems to work fine.

Yeah, I've been noticing this as well.

jamie.


pgprZJml1rier.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[David Edmondson]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote:
 Meanwhile, I'm aware of two regressions I'd like to see fixed before
 0.3:
 
   * Reply is now splitting the window
 
 We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
 what's the advantage of splitting here?

Patch sent.

   * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
 order.
 
 A minor point, but it would be nice to fix this.

Patch sent.

dme.
-- 
David Edmondson, http://dme.org
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Carl Worth]

 On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote:
* Reply is now splitting the window

 Patch sent.
* Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
  order.

 Patch sent.

Perfect!

Both of these are pushed now.

Thanks for the quick fixes.

-Carl

-- 
carl.d.wo...@intel.com
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:28:29 +0100, David Edmondson d...@dme.org wrote:


pgpRbUkKmL0SP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[David Edmondson]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 09:53:17 -0700, Dirk Hohndel  
wrote:
> >   * Reply is now splitting the window
> > 
> > We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
> > what's the advantage of splitting here?
> 
> I'll voice my "don't like" of this feature as well, I guess.

This depends at least somewhat on the setting of `pop-up-windows'. Maybe
we should:

 (let ((pop-up-windows nil))
  ...)

in the reply code?

I think that notmuch window handling generally needs some consideration
and improvement.

> > Finally, any of the tweaks I suggested to notmuch-hello mode would be
> > quite welcome. I might take a whack at some of these.

Hopefully early next week for me.

dme.
-- 
David Edmondson, http://dme.org

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Dirk Hohndel]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:05:55 -0700, Dirk Hohndel  
wrote:
> > Dirk also mentioned in IRC that there's a regression with the signature
> > being mispositioned before the quoted text with a reply buffer. Now that
> > I've added a signature, I'm noticing this as well.
> 
> Well - we don't seem to be adding the signature ourselves anymore... I
> still don't quite understand where and how we hand over to the existing
> message-mode functions - I why those decide to insert a signature at
> point.

Learning elisp every day. I think I now understand at least somewhat
what's happening there...

> Here's a trivial patch that ALSO adds a signature at the end of the
> message buffer (where it belongs). But I haven't figured out how to get
> rid of the one above the reply...
> 
> diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
> index acb7dbf..493cd0e 100644
> --- a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
> +++ b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
> @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
>  ;; line and then the body.
>  (with-temp-buffer
>(call-process notmuch-command nil t nil "reply" query-string)
> +  (message-insert-signature)
>(goto-char (point-min))
>(if (re-search-forward "^$" nil t)
> (save-excursion

This patch is of course completely bogus. But understanding why it was
bogus helped me come up with this patch, that hopefully makes more
sense. People who ACTUALLY understand elisp - please take a look

(I could have sworn there was a variable somewhere that gives me the
correct regex to search for a signature separator... but I can't find
it. so please replace '-- ' with that if you know)

diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
index acb7dbf..05c9603 100644
--- a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
+++ b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
@@ -82,7 +82,13 @@
 (message-hide-headers)
 (save-excursion
   (goto-char (point-max))
-  (insert body))
+  (if (re-search-backward "-- " nil t)
+ (progn 
+   (forward-line -1)
+   (insert body))
+   (progn
+ (goto-char (point-max))
+ (insert body
 (set-buffer-modified-p nil)))

 (defun notmuch-mua-forward-message ()


-- 
Dirk Hohndel
Intel Open Source Technology Center

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Dirk Hohndel]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 14:45:45 -0700, Carl Worth  wrote:
> > It doesn't for me with origin/master. Or let me double check... what do
> > you think would be the correct order (as this is a matter of taste for
> > some people)...
> 
> The order in the reply buffer is fine. But with "m" I get the User-Agent
> first which looks a bit strange.

Yep, same here.

> Dirk also mentioned in IRC that there's a regression with the signature
> being mispositioned before the quoted text with a reply buffer. Now that
> I've added a signature, I'm noticing this as well.

Well - we don't seem to be adding the signature ourselves anymore... I
still don't quite understand where and how we hand over to the existing
message-mode functions - I why those decide to insert a signature at
point.

Here's a trivial patch that ALSO adds a signature at the end of the
message buffer (where it belongs). But I haven't figured out how to get
rid of the one above the reply...

diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
index acb7dbf..493cd0e 100644
--- a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
+++ b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
@@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
 ;; line and then the body.
 (with-temp-buffer
   (call-process notmuch-command nil t nil "reply" query-string)
+  (message-insert-signature)
   (goto-char (point-min))
   (if (re-search-forward "^$" nil t)
  (save-excursion

> > I think we should make this a "requirement" for patches to include a
> > little NEWS blurb and either a test case or an explanation why there
> > isn't a test case...
> 
> I've asked for these, but I haven't been pushing hard on this.

I will start playing the nagger

> Review for some of these simple things would be much appreciated from
> anybody on the list, (and would help ensure that patches are more likely
> to be ready-to-go once I get them). So let's see more of things like
> this from anyone on the list:
> 
>   Looks like a great feature---now it just needs a test case.
> 
>   I've tested this and it does just what I want. Here's a
>   follow-on patch that adds an item to the NEWS file for this.
> 
>   I can't common on the specific logic of the patch, but I did
>   notice some trailing whitespace. You'll want to clean that up
>   and resubmit so the patch won't be rejected.

I can do all of those.

/D

-- 
Dirk Hohndel
Intel Open Source Technology Center

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Carl Worth]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 09:53:17 -0700, Dirk Hohndel  
wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth  wrote:
>
> I sent a patch last night - but it's not realtive to the last thing that
> I sent, instead relative to last night's master. Do you want me to
> create another one?

No, what you sent last night is perfect. That will be easier for me.

> It doesn't for me with origin/master. Or let me double check... what do
> you think would be the correct order (as this is a matter of taste for
> some people)...

The order in the reply buffer is fine. But with "m" I get the User-Agent
first which looks a bit strange.

Dirk also mentioned in IRC that there's a regression with the signature
being mispositioned before the quoted text with a reply buffer. Now that
I've added a signature, I'm noticing this as well.

> I think we should make this a "requirement" for patches to include a
> little NEWS blurb and either a test case or an explanation why there
> isn't a test case...

I've asked for these, but I haven't been pushing hard on this.

Review for some of these simple things would be much appreciated from
anybody on the list, (and would help ensure that patches are more likely
to be ready-to-go once I get them). So let's see more of things like
this from anyone on the list:

Looks like a great feature---now it just needs a test case.

I've tested this and it does just what I want. Here's a
follow-on patch that adds an item to the NEWS file for this.

I can't common on the specific logic of the patch, but I did
notice some trailing whitespace. You'll want to clean that up
and resubmit so the patch won't be rejected.

Thanks,

-Carl

-- 
carl.d.worth at intel.com
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Dirk Hohndel]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth  wrote:
> I pushed hard to get most everything we wanted for 0.3 done yesterday,
> (which was one week since 0.2). I think we're still within the tolerance
> of my published "about a week" schedule, but I would like to wrap things
> up soon.
> 
> Here are the features that I still have left in my queue at this point:
> 
>   * improve from-header guessing
> 
> Dirk is looking into fixing a segfault found by the test suite here

I sent a patch last night - but it's not realtive to the last thing that
I sent, instead relative to last night's master. Do you want me to
create another one?

Basically, the way I was trying to do concatenation of Received headers
earlier was fundamentally broken - it made assumptions about being able
to continue reading the headers even after we closed the file already.

Not so good.

>   * Fcc, Maildir, and Emacs message-mode -- a bit of code
> 
> This is next on my list to apply. Thanks for the extra testing!
> 
> There are a few other features that people had proposed but that didn't
> pass review yet. If people follow-up with those quickly, they can still
> go in. Otherwise, there's another new merge window coming up soon!

I'll be working on notmuch for the next few hours and once my git trees
are straightened out again, I'll look into what's missing from my wish
list

> Meanwhile, I'm aware of two regressions I'd like to see fixed before
> 0.3:
> 
>   * Reply is now splitting the window
> 
> We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
> what's the advantage of splitting here?

I'll voice my "don't like" of this feature as well, I guess.

>   * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
> order.
> 
> A minor point, but it would be nice to fix this.

It doesn't for me with origin/master. Or let me double check... what do
you think would be the correct order (as this is a matter of taste for
some people)...

> Finally, any of the tweaks I suggested to notmuch-hello mode would be
> quite welcome. I might take a whack at some of these.
> 
> Then, there's the task of writing up NEWS. Dirk started helping with
> that, which I appreciate. If anyone else wants to write up descriptions
> of their favorite features that have been merged, that would be great.

I think we should make this a "requirement" for patches to include a
little NEWS blurb and either a test case or an explanation why there
isn't a test case...

/D

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Carl Worth]

I pushed hard to get most everything we wanted for 0.3 done yesterday,
(which was one week since 0.2). I think we're still within the tolerance
of my published "about a week" schedule, but I would like to wrap things
up soon.

Here are the features that I still have left in my queue at this point:

  * improve from-header guessing

Dirk is looking into fixing a segfault found by the test suite here

  * Fcc, Maildir, and Emacs message-mode -- a bit of code

This is next on my list to apply. Thanks for the extra testing!

There are a few other features that people had proposed but that didn't
pass review yet. If people follow-up with those quickly, they can still
go in. Otherwise, there's another new merge window coming up soon!

Meanwhile, I'm aware of two regressions I'd like to see fixed before
0.3:

  * Reply is now splitting the window

We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
what's the advantage of splitting here?

  * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
order.

A minor point, but it would be nice to fix this.

Finally, any of the tweaks I suggested to notmuch-hello mode would be
quite welcome. I might take a whack at some of these.

Then, there's the task of writing up NEWS. Dirk started helping with
that, which I appreciate. If anyone else wants to write up descriptions
of their favorite features that have been merged, that would be great.

-Carl



-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Carl Worth]

I pushed hard to get most everything we wanted for 0.3 done yesterday,
(which was one week since 0.2). I think we're still within the tolerance
of my published about a week schedule, but I would like to wrap things
up soon.

Here are the features that I still have left in my queue at this point:

  * improve from-header guessing

Dirk is looking into fixing a segfault found by the test suite here

  * Fcc, Maildir, and Emacs message-mode -- a bit of code

This is next on my list to apply. Thanks for the extra testing!

There are a few other features that people had proposed but that didn't
pass review yet. If people follow-up with those quickly, they can still
go in. Otherwise, there's another new merge window coming up soon!

Meanwhile, I'm aware of two regressions I'd like to see fixed before
0.3:

  * Reply is now splitting the window

We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
what's the advantage of splitting here?

  * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
order.

A minor point, but it would be nice to fix this.

Finally, any of the tweaks I suggested to notmuch-hello mode would be
quite welcome. I might take a whack at some of these.

Then, there's the task of writing up NEWS. Dirk started helping with
that, which I appreciate. If anyone else wants to write up descriptions
of their favorite features that have been merged, that would be great.

-Carl





pgp9kQqOqzLl2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Dirk Hohndel]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote:
 I pushed hard to get most everything we wanted for 0.3 done yesterday,
 (which was one week since 0.2). I think we're still within the tolerance
 of my published about a week schedule, but I would like to wrap things
 up soon.
 
 Here are the features that I still have left in my queue at this point:
 
   * improve from-header guessing
 
 Dirk is looking into fixing a segfault found by the test suite here

I sent a patch last night - but it's not realtive to the last thing that
I sent, instead relative to last night's master. Do you want me to
create another one?

Basically, the way I was trying to do concatenation of Received headers
earlier was fundamentally broken - it made assumptions about being able
to continue reading the headers even after we closed the file already.

Not so good.
 
   * Fcc, Maildir, and Emacs message-mode -- a bit of code
 
 This is next on my list to apply. Thanks for the extra testing!
 
 There are a few other features that people had proposed but that didn't
 pass review yet. If people follow-up with those quickly, they can still
 go in. Otherwise, there's another new merge window coming up soon!

I'll be working on notmuch for the next few hours and once my git trees
are straightened out again, I'll look into what's missing from my wish
list

 Meanwhile, I'm aware of two regressions I'd like to see fixed before
 0.3:
 
   * Reply is now splitting the window
 
 We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
 what's the advantage of splitting here?

I'll voice my don't like of this feature as well, I guess.

   * Composing a new message with 'm' brings up headers in a scrambled
 order.
 
 A minor point, but it would be nice to fix this.

It doesn't for me with origin/master. Or let me double check... what do
you think would be the correct order (as this is a matter of taste for
some people)...

 Finally, any of the tweaks I suggested to notmuch-hello mode would be
 quite welcome. I might take a whack at some of these.
 
 Then, there's the task of writing up NEWS. Dirk started helping with
 that, which I appreciate. If anyone else wants to write up descriptions
 of their favorite features that have been merged, that would be great.

I think we should make this a requirement for patches to include a
little NEWS blurb and either a test case or an explanation why there
isn't a test case...

/D
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[David Edmondson]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 09:53:17 -0700, Dirk Hohndel hohn...@infradead.org wrote:
* Reply is now splitting the window
  
  We're copying the original message into the new reply buffer, so
  what's the advantage of splitting here?
 
 I'll voice my don't like of this feature as well, I guess.

This depends at least somewhat on the setting of `pop-up-windows'. Maybe
we should:

 (let ((pop-up-windows nil))
  ...)

in the reply code?

I think that notmuch window handling generally needs some consideration
and improvement.

  Finally, any of the tweaks I suggested to notmuch-hello mode would be
  quite welcome. I might take a whack at some of these.

Hopefully early next week for me.

dme.
-- 
David Edmondson, http://dme.org
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Carl Worth]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 09:53:17 -0700, Dirk Hohndel hohn...@infradead.org wrote:
 On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 08:37:11 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote:

 I sent a patch last night - but it's not realtive to the last thing that
 I sent, instead relative to last night's master. Do you want me to
 create another one?

No, what you sent last night is perfect. That will be easier for me.

 It doesn't for me with origin/master. Or let me double check... what do
 you think would be the correct order (as this is a matter of taste for
 some people)...

The order in the reply buffer is fine. But with m I get the User-Agent
first which looks a bit strange.

Dirk also mentioned in IRC that there's a regression with the signature
being mispositioned before the quoted text with a reply buffer. Now that
I've added a signature, I'm noticing this as well.

 I think we should make this a requirement for patches to include a
 little NEWS blurb and either a test case or an explanation why there
 isn't a test case...

I've asked for these, but I haven't been pushing hard on this.

Review for some of these simple things would be much appreciated from
anybody on the list, (and would help ensure that patches are more likely
to be ready-to-go once I get them). So let's see more of things like
this from anyone on the list:

Looks like a great feature---now it just needs a test case.

I've tested this and it does just what I want. Here's a
follow-on patch that adds an item to the NEWS file for this.

I can't common on the specific logic of the patch, but I did
notice some trailing whitespace. You'll want to clean that up
and resubmit so the patch won't be rejected.

Thanks,

-Carl

-- 
carl.d.wo...@intel.com


pgpb7ymAi5uPb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Dirk Hohndel]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 14:45:45 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote:
  It doesn't for me with origin/master. Or let me double check... what do
  you think would be the correct order (as this is a matter of taste for
  some people)...
 
 The order in the reply buffer is fine. But with m I get the User-Agent
 first which looks a bit strange.

Yep, same here.
 
 Dirk also mentioned in IRC that there's a regression with the signature
 being mispositioned before the quoted text with a reply buffer. Now that
 I've added a signature, I'm noticing this as well.

Well - we don't seem to be adding the signature ourselves anymore... I
still don't quite understand where and how we hand over to the existing
message-mode functions - I why those decide to insert a signature at
point.

Here's a trivial patch that ALSO adds a signature at the end of the
message buffer (where it belongs). But I haven't figured out how to get
rid of the one above the reply...

diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
index acb7dbf..493cd0e 100644
--- a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
+++ b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
@@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
 ;; line and then the body.
 (with-temp-buffer
   (call-process notmuch-command nil t nil reply query-string)
+  (message-insert-signature)
   (goto-char (point-min))
   (if (re-search-forward ^$ nil t)
  (save-excursion

  I think we should make this a requirement for patches to include a
  little NEWS blurb and either a test case or an explanation why there
  isn't a test case...
 
 I've asked for these, but I haven't been pushing hard on this.

I will start playing the nagger
 
 Review for some of these simple things would be much appreciated from
 anybody on the list, (and would help ensure that patches are more likely
 to be ready-to-go once I get them). So let's see more of things like
 this from anyone on the list:
 
   Looks like a great feature---now it just needs a test case.
 
   I've tested this and it does just what I want. Here's a
   follow-on patch that adds an item to the NEWS file for this.
 
   I can't common on the specific logic of the patch, but I did
   notice some trailing whitespace. You'll want to clean that up
   and resubmit so the patch won't be rejected.

I can do all of those.

/D

-- 
Dirk Hohndel
Intel Open Source Technology Center
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch

Re: Wrapping up the 0.3 release

[Dirk Hohndel]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:05:55 -0700, Dirk Hohndel hohn...@infradead.org wrote:
  Dirk also mentioned in IRC that there's a regression with the signature
  being mispositioned before the quoted text with a reply buffer. Now that
  I've added a signature, I'm noticing this as well.
 
 Well - we don't seem to be adding the signature ourselves anymore... I
 still don't quite understand where and how we hand over to the existing
 message-mode functions - I why those decide to insert a signature at
 point.

Learning elisp every day. I think I now understand at least somewhat
what's happening there...
 
 Here's a trivial patch that ALSO adds a signature at the end of the
 message buffer (where it belongs). But I haven't figured out how to get
 rid of the one above the reply...
 
 diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
 index acb7dbf..493cd0e 100644
 --- a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
 +++ b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
 @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
  ;; line and then the body.
  (with-temp-buffer
(call-process notmuch-command nil t nil reply query-string)
 +  (message-insert-signature)
(goto-char (point-min))
(if (re-search-forward ^$ nil t)
 (save-excursion

This patch is of course completely bogus. But understanding why it was
bogus helped me come up with this patch, that hopefully makes more
sense. People who ACTUALLY understand elisp - please take a look

(I could have sworn there was a variable somewhere that gives me the
correct regex to search for a signature separator... but I can't find
it. so please replace '-- ' with that if you know)

diff --git a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
index acb7dbf..05c9603 100644
--- a/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
+++ b/emacs/notmuch-mua.el
@@ -82,7 +82,13 @@
 (message-hide-headers)
 (save-excursion
   (goto-char (point-max))
-  (insert body))
+  (if (re-search-backward --  nil t)
+ (progn 
+   (forward-line -1)
+   (insert body))
+   (progn
+ (goto-char (point-max))
+ (insert body
 (set-buffer-modified-p nil)))
 
 (defun notmuch-mua-forward-message ()


-- 
Dirk Hohndel
Intel Open Source Technology Center
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch