On Jun 29 21:53, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Brendan Cully wrote:
>
> > I think we'll end up making a table of how new mail and unread old
> > mail should be handled by the buffy list, c' ',
> > c, mutt startup, etc. A long time ago Vladimir
> > Marek started on this, but I got busy and droppe
Hi,
* Brendan Cully wrote:
> I think we'll end up making a table of how new mail and unread old
> mail should be handled by the buffy list, c' ',
> c, mutt startup, etc. A long time ago Vladimir
> Marek started on this, but I got busy and dropped it.
I've started collecting ideas at:
http://dev
On Thursday, 25 June 2009 at 22:32, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jun 23 21:00, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> > Hi Derek, list,
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:33:59 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> > > For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to process my mail
> > > would be like this:
> >
> >
On Jun 23 21:00, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> Hi Derek, list,
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:33:59 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> > For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to process my mail
> > would be like this:
>
> Thanks for this. It pretty much conforms to my work model.
>
> > nagging t
Hi,
* Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Rocco Rutte [06-23-09 17:16]:
> > * Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> >
> > > One think I find lacking is a flag in the
> > > directory listing similar to the "N", new mail flag, showing folders
> > > containing "O", old mail. I want to know where *unread* mail is, not
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:00:20PM +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> I agree that keeping mails marked as "new" does not allow
> differentiation between "now but seen" and "new and not yet
> seen". But it has worked for me so well for such a long time. Like
> you, I don't go to the length to mark/fla
On Tuesday, 23 June 2009 at 23:17, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Derek Martin wrote:
>
> > For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to process my mail
> > would be like this:
>
> > 1. start mutt
> > 2. enter first mailbox (in order listed in .muttrc) which contains
> > new mail.
>
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:17:01PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Derek Martin wrote:
>
> > For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to process my mail
> > would be like this:
>
> > 1. start mutt
> > 2. enter first mailbox (in order listed in .muttrc) which contains
> > new
* Rocco Rutte [06-23-09 17:16]:
> * Patrick Shanahan wrote:
>
> > One think I find lacking is a flag in the
> > directory listing similar to the "N", new mail flag, showing folders
> > containing "O", old mail. I want to know where *unread* mail is, not
> > *just* new mail.
>
> This is not as e
Hi,
* Derek Martin wrote:
> For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to process my mail
> would be like this:
> 1. start mutt
> 2. enter first mailbox (in order listed in .muttrc) which contains
> new mail.
> 3. move to the next mailbox in listed order *in a ring* containing
>
Hi,
* Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> One think I find lacking is a flag in the
> directory listing similar to the "N", new mail flag, showing folders
> containing "O", old mail. I want to know where *unread* mail is, not
> *just* new mail.
This is not as easy at it sounds. At least (unfortunately) n
On 2009-06-23 14:27:44 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> Actually I do flag e-mails... though it's somewhat rare. I currently
> use a 3-tier approach to marking the importance of mails I leave
> around. In order:
>
> 1. leave the messages marked new: I want to be positive I address
> these soon
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:00:20PM +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> The new work model is a large change for myself.
But note that if you were using maildir, it wouldn't be. ;-)
> If I have no choice, I will have to go along and do it that way. I
> agree that keeping mails marked as "new" does no
* Moritz Barsnick [06-23-09 15:02]:
>
> P.S.: To mark all currently "N"ew mails as "O"ld, do I just set
> mark_old=yes and enter and leave a folder?
afaik, but you can do the same by viewing the mbox file with nail/mail
and immediately leaving via the "q" option which saves changes.
Opening the
Hi Derek, list,
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:33:59 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to process my mail
> would be like this:
Thanks for this. It pretty much conforms to my work model.
> nagging the user about new mail in folders they visited recently (y
* Derek Martin [06-23-09 12:36]:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 05:22:20PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> > The mentioned $next_unread_mailbox is within some 3rd party patch and
> > IIRC makes change folder suggest the next in the list with new mail, not
> > the first. I haven't used it though.
>
> For w
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 05:22:20PM +0200, Rocco Rutte wrote:
> The mentioned $next_unread_mailbox is within some 3rd party patch and
> IIRC makes change folder suggest the next in the list with new mail, not
> the first. I haven't used it though.
For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to
Hi,
* Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> I applied these two on top of 1.5.20. But I think changeset
> 5922:9ae13dedb5ed doesn't make sense to me.
By (mutt's) definition a mailbox has new mail if it has as least one
message that is neither read, nor deleted, nor marked as old. That's the
way it works for
On Monday, June 22 at 10:43 AM, quoth Derek Martin:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 04:43:27PM +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
I think this behavior is not desired.
I meant to add that if you want to mark something that needs your
attention, but *don't* want to treat it as new (unseen) mail, then you
sh
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 04:43:27PM +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> I think this behavior is not desired.
I meant to add that if you want to mark something that needs your
attention, but *don't* want to treat it as new (unseen) mail, then you
should not leave it marked new; you should instead flag
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 04:43:27PM +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> I applied these two on top of 1.5.20. But I think changeset
> 5922:9ae13dedb5ed doesn't make sense to me. If I leave any mail marked
> as new (which I do if I intend to yet read it or work on it) in any
> folder, mutt marks the who
p atime for mbox/mmdf also when mailbox is unchanged but has
> new mail. See #1362.
>
> http://dev.mutt.org/hg/mutt/rev/bd59be56c6b0
> changeset: 5921:bd59be56c6b0
> branch: HEAD
> user:Rocco Rutte
> date:Fri Jun 19 19:27:37 2009 +0200
> summary:
22 matches
Mail list logo
