Hello all, Currently, pressing R on the compose menu, will trigger <rename-file>, which purpose is to "rename/move an attached file". What this will do is rename the underlying file. I don't think this makes much sense, so I coded an alternative [1].
However, when I ran this idea by Kevin, he pointed out that what I coded amounts to a change in mutt's behaviour, which he thinks is unlikely to be accepted. I understand that changing behaviour is something that should be done only when there is a compelling reason for it; what I do *not* understand is what compelling reason can there be for leaving the current behaviour as it is. That is to say, with the current implementation, to rename an attachment one has to first get a temporary copy of it (<get-attachment>), and then do <rename-file> on that copy. What is the rationale for doing this, instead of simply changing the name of the attachment used in the email (and leaving the underlying file untouched)? --Óscar PS: I previously wrote about this here:http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.mutt.devel/21586
[1]: This is actually an old patch that I got to improve as of late (itis still pending an update). See https://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3706
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
