On 2007-09-10 09:30:26 -0500, Kyle Wheeler wrote:
> Since it's supposed to be ~y EXPR, perhaps we could just expand the
> definition of EXPR to support standard regex word delimiter syntax. That
> way a good pattern could be:
>
> ~y \
That would be much longer to type (and I don't think that
On Monday, September 10 at 09:36 AM, quoth Vincent Lefevre:
On 2007-09-06 10:40:05 -0500, David Champion wrote:
Seems like a degenerate case of labelling to me.
red, ~yred.
A number of people use labels as a kind of virtual folder
implementation. I use it that way only some, but it works admir
On 2007-09-06 10:40:05 -0500, David Champion wrote:
> Seems like a degenerate case of labelling to me.
> red, ~yred.
>
> A number of people use labels as a kind of virtual folder
> implementation. I use it that way only some, but it works admirably...
> if you have .
Yes. The only problem is tha
On 2007-09-05 11:40:41 -0700, Brendan Cully wrote:
> yes, I agree very much with this. That's why the emacs input
> method seems more suitable - mutt's input line is a lot like the
> emacs minibuffer.
+1
--
Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 10:40:05AM -0500, David Champion wrote:
> Seems like a degenerate case of labelling to me.
> red, ~yred.
I can't find "edit-label", so I'm going to assume it's something you're
proposing.
Yeah, basically the flags are like labels, and it would be nice to use
labels instea
* On 2007.08.31, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
* "Rocco Rutte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 2) When interactively entering 'attachments ?' it'll end curses, print the
> current attachments settings to stdout and re-enter curses. This doesn't
> look very nice. Furthermore, if a user has more se
> I strongly agree with this too. In hindsight, the emacs technique of
> growing the input line as necessary seems like the obvious way to go.
This would be my preference stylistically, but my greater concern is
bandwidth. I still find myself working over low-throughput connections
more often tha
> Basically, Outlook gives you the ability to "flag" a message, with something
> like 8 different colours. You then set up a virtual (search) folder which
> matches messages - say, blue flags only - potentially along with various
> other criteria (say, mail received in the last week).
Seems like a
Hi,
* Brendan Cully [07-09-05 11:40:41 -0700] wrote:
On Wednesday, 05 September 2007 at 09:56, Rocco Rutte wrote:
* Brendan Cully [07-09-04 11:37:26 -0700] wrote:
On Monday, 03 September 2007 at 08:44, Rocco Rutte wrote:
* Marco d'Itri [07-09-01 11:58:56 +0200] wrote:
I believe that a wind
On Wednesday, 05 September 2007 at 09:56, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Brendan Cully [07-09-04 11:37:26 -0700] wrote:
>> On Monday, 03 September 2007 at 08:44, Rocco Rutte wrote:
>>> * Marco d'Itri [07-09-01 11:58:56 +0200] wrote:
>
I believe that a window in the middle of the screen really
Hi,
* Brendan Cully [07-09-04 11:37:26 -0700] wrote:
On Monday, 03 September 2007 at 08:44, Rocco Rutte wrote:
* Marco d'Itri [07-09-01 11:58:56 +0200] wrote:
I believe that a window in the middle of the screen really looks out of
place. Dynamically widening the status bar would be much more
On Tuesday, 04 September 2007 at 03:44, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2007-09-03 22:43:05 +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > * Vincent Lefevre [07-09-03 18:02:13 +0200] wrote:
> >> On 2007-09-02 15:14:25 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> >
> >>> Nah... tag-replying is a totally essential featur
On Monday, 03 September 2007 at 08:44, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Marco d'Itri [07-09-01 11:58:56 +0200] wrote:
>> On Aug 31, Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> Sounds like a good idea. I wonder, though, whether it might be
>>> useful to move the subwindow toward the bottom of th
On 2007-09-04 01:02:57 +0100, Paul Walker wrote:
> Unfortunately, mutt doesn't have the virtual folders, and it only
> has one flag. Off the top of my head, I think it should be
> *possible* to extend mutt to support virtual folders, but I don't
> see anyone doing the work in the near future...
Yo
On 2007-09-03 22:43:05 +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Vincent Lefevre [07-09-03 18:02:13 +0200] wrote:
>> On 2007-09-02 15:14:25 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
>>> Nah... tag-replying is a totally essential feature. :)
>
>> Yes, except that generates a reply DAG instead of a reply tree, an
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 11:10:54AM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> Granted, it's still way, way better than trying to do it with Outlook,
> which some of my coworkers do. I don't have any idea how they manage
> it. ;)
Actually, what you've described is one of the cases where Outlook is really
usefu
Hi,
* Derek Martin [07-09-03 15:50:02 -0400] wrote:
I've used plenty of curses-based programs where the same colors as the
main window are used (especially on monochrome displays) and it seems
to work fine. But, I think the right thing to do here is, since
you're adding an entirely new UI elem
Hi,
* Vincent Lefevre [07-09-03 18:02:13 +0200] wrote:
On 2007-09-02 15:14:25 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
Nah... tag-replying is a totally essential feature. :)
Yes, except that generates a reply DAG instead of a reply tree, and
Mutt won't display the DAG.
Just out of curiosity: which
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 01:18:27PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Vladimír Marek [07-09-02 11:34:50 +0200] wrote:
>
> >JUst out of curiosity, how do you compose message out of different mails
> >? For example you reply to someone, but need to include part of another
> >mail you got the day
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 01:30:43PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> For simplicity I simply chose the status bar color pair, but that is of
> course debatable. The basic requirement I think is that the overlay
> window is clearly distinctable from the underlying menu and I doubt if
> we can programma
On 2007-09-03 18:08:13 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 2007-09-03 18:02:13 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Yes, except that generates a reply DAG instead of a reply tree,
> > and Mutt won't display the DAG.
>
> I might be dense here. What do you mean by "DAG"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D
On 2007-09-03 18:02:13 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Yes, except that generates a reply DAG instead of a reply tree,
> and Mutt won't display the DAG.
I might be dense here. What do you mean by "DAG"?
--
Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 2007-09-02 15:14:25 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 2007-09-02 15:08:10 +0200, Vladimír Marek wrote:
>
> >> Tag the messages you want to reply. Then "; r" and you have
> >> them all in your editor ;)
>
> > That's insane :) It would never cross my mind that you can tag-reply.
>
> Nah... ta
ra overhead,
the terminal-oriented UI would remain. You get the best of both
worlds.
> You could keep a terminal mode around, but I would be surprised if
> all (or even most) of the benefits of an updated architecture were
> to manifest themselves in such a mode.
Well, new mail detection, f
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 01:15:32AM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> There are no GUI apps I can think of that have menus pop up on the
> bottom of their windows. Can you name some?
Does the in-page search dialog in Firefox count? There's some other
applications which have similar search boxes.
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 10:17:43 +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> That mutt is starting to show its age is doubtlessly true. That its
> heavy reliance on a single text terminal is quite limiting is true
> as well. At the same time, there are use cases where that
> limitation is actually a plu
On 2007-09-03 01:15:32 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
>> It's not about noticing, but about causing minimal confusion.
>
> It's hardly confusing. The typical user is highly accustomed to
> interacting with GUI applications, virtually 100% of which have
> dialog boxes pop up either in the middle of t
On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 01:15:32AM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> the current code base desperately needs to be abandoned, and a fresh
> rewrite started with modularity and modernization in mind.
>
that sounds like a revolution - and doesn't make too much sense from a
mutt perspective. it would be m
Hi,
* Derek Martin [07-09-03 01:15:32 -0400] wrote:
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:08:08AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
The panel is conceptually *EXTREMELY* different from an application's
menus and dialog boxes. There are no GUI apps I can think of that
have menus pop up on the bottom of thei
Hi,
* Marco d'Itri [07-09-01 11:58:56 +0200] wrote:
On Aug 31, Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sounds like a good idea. I wonder, though, whether it might be
useful to move the subwindow toward the bottom of the screen, to
basically grow out of the status bar / entry line. I'd su
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:08:08AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> > I'm in no way suggesting that the GUI interface should/could
> > replace the terminal-oriented interface... just that both are
> > often quite useful. I'm also aware that mutt can do formatting
> > of rtf messages, but that requi
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 10:08:08AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 2007-09-02 00:44:15 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
>
> > This, on the other hand, seems kind of yucky to me... not because
> > there's anything inherently bad about it, but just because it
> > breaks with long-standing UI design pra
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:40:05PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> 1) mutt_multi_choice() is currently used to let the user choose from quite
> a number of possible options. To fit in 80x25 they're abbreviated which
That looks nice. ;-)
> 2) When interactively entering 'attachments ?' it'll end cu
On 2007-09-02 15:08:10 +0200, Vladimír Marek wrote:
>> Tag the messages you want to reply. Then "; r" and you have
>> them all in your editor ;)
> That's insane :) It would never cross my mind that you can tag-reply.
Nah... tag-replying is a totally essential feature. :)
--
Thomas Roessler
> I don't think that was meant. What was meant (I think) was this: when
> writing some reply to a message in a thread, you want to re-read a part
> of it and possibly refer to another message ala "foo wrote this" or "bar
> wrote that".
>
> If you have the editor in a different window and mutt s
> > JUst out of curiosity, how do you compose message out of different
> > mails ? For example you reply to someone, but need to include part
> > of another mail you got the day before.
[...]
> > I'm just wondering if someone is using some trick or something
> > more user friendly.
>
> Tag the mes
Hi,
* Derek Martin [07-09-02 00:44:15 -0400] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:40:05PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
1) mutt_multi_choice() is currently used to let the user choose from
quite a number of possible options. To fit in 80x25 they're abbreviated
which obviously doesn't look nice. I've
Hi,
* Vladimír Marek [07-09-02 11:34:50 +0200] wrote:
JUst out of curiosity, how do you compose message out of different mails
? For example you reply to someone, but need to include part of another
mail you got the day before.
I don't think that was meant. What was meant (I think) was this:
On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Derek Martin wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:40:05PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
1) mutt_multi_choice() is currently used to let the user choose from
quite a number of possible options. To fit in 80x25 they're abbreviated
which obviously doesn't look nice. I've put together
On Sun, 02 Sep 2007 the mental interface of
Vladimír Marek told:
> [...]
[...]
> JUst out of curiosity, how do you compose message out of different
> mails ? For example you reply to someone, but need to include part
> of another mail you got the day before.
>
> The way I'm using is to do normal
[...]
> > FWIW, I've also always wanted Mutt to have a multi-paned interface,
> > not unlike most GUI mailers: one pane for the folder list, one for the
> > message index, and one to display messages.
>
> Incidentally, I wouldn't want to have that particular kind of UI for
> myself. The current
On 2007-09-02 00:44:15 -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> This, on the other hand, seems kind of yucky to me... not because
> there's anything inherently bad about it, but just because it
> breaks with long-standing UI design practices. Dialog boxes
> generally go in the middle of the main window, and
On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 05:40:05PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> 1) mutt_multi_choice() is currently used to let the user choose from
> quite a number of possible options. To fit in 80x25 they're abbreviated
> which obviously doesn't look nice. I've put together a patch that adds a
> dialog and pu
On Aug 31, Thomas Roessler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sounds like a good idea. I wonder, though, whether it might be
> useful to move the subwindow toward the bottom of the screen, to
> basically grow out of the status bar / entry line. I'd suspect that
> most long-time mutt users will have th
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 the mental interface of
Rocco Rutte told:
[...]
If there's interest in these ideas, I'll polish the patches up for
publishing and send them to the list.
Yes, please ;) Will test wether your patch conflicts with the not
yet mainstream included sidebar patch.
Elimar
--
On
On 2007-08-31 17:40:05 +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> 1) mutt_multi_choice() is currently used to let the user choose
> from quite a number of possible options. To fit in 80x25 they're
> abbreviated which obviously doesn't look nice. I've put together
> a patch that adds a dialog and puts it in a cur
On Friday, 31 August 2007 at 17:40, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> currently I have two ideas (well, one from #mutt) for UI enhancements and
> like to ask for input.
>
> 1) mutt_multi_choice() is currently used to let the user choose from quite a
> number of possible opt
* Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08-31-07 11:43]:
[...]
> If there's interest in these ideas, I'll polish the patches up for
> publishing and send them to the list.
Good idea and implementation. Would be more benefit to a newer user,
but even those who have used mutt for years, still find ne
On Friday, August 31 at 05:40 PM, quoth Rocco Rutte:
currently I have two ideas (well, one from #mutt) for UI
enhancements and like to ask for input.
Looks nifty!
~Kyle
--
Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the
comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God&#
Hi,
currently I have two ideas (well, one from #mutt) for UI enhancements
and like to ask for input.
1) mutt_multi_choice() is currently used to let the user choose from
quite a number of possible options. To fit in 80x25 they're abbreviated
which obviously doesn't look nice
50 matches
Mail list logo
