begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 04:31:01PM +0100:
>
> The point is that there're lots of people having to use it at work. Even
> if those people are familiar to the standards, what shall they do if
> they're not abled to convince someone with the power of decission no
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 08:25:21:AM -0500 Shawn McMahon wrote:
> begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 12:04:14AM +0100:
> >
> > Just wondering why 1524 is so important to you...
> You lost me.
You lost me. We lost us. ;-)
> To the best of my knowledge, I have never
begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 12:04:14AM +0100:
>
> Just wondering why 1524 is so important to you...
You lost me. To the best of my knowledge, I have never discussed
RFC1524 in this or any other mailing list, prior to this exchange.
RFC1521 is important to me be
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 03:14:14:PM -0500 Shawn McMahon wrote:
> begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 07:58:17PM +0100:
> >
> > > At the very least, it doesn't read RFC1521-compliant mails as
> > > recommended in the standard.
> >
> > Which has status informational o
begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 07:58:17PM +0100:
>
> > At the very least, it doesn't read RFC1521-compliant mails as
> > recommended in the standard.
>
> Which has status informational only.
Ok, first, wrong, it's standards-track, not informational.
However, it *I
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 12:18:11:PM -0500 Shawn McMahon wrote:
> begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 06:12:41AM +0100:
> >
> > Not that I know, but it is quite dangerous to talk about Outlook in the
> > context of mail clients.
> Oh, it is a mail client, it's just n
begin quoting what Rocco Rutte said on Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 06:12:41AM +0100:
>
> Not that I know, but it is quite dangerous to talk about Outlook in the
> context of mail clients.
Oh, it is a mail client, it's just not an Internet mail client.
At the very least, it doesn't read RFC1521-compli
Hi Rob!
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
> Care to give some examples?
folder-hook =folder 'push T~r>1m\n' if [ ~T ]; then 'push \;s=archiv\n' fi
--
[ markus hubig ] [ mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [ debian/gnu linux (sid) ]
[ vorholzstrasse 6 ] [ saft: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [
Rocco Rutte ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) muttered:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 02:09:41:PM -0700 Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
>
> > Care to give some examples?
>
> if [ muttversion != "1.5.0" ]; then
> source ~/.mutt/setup/nntp
> fi
Quoting the fine manual section 3.0:
In addition, mutt supports v
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 02:50:29:PM +0100 Sven Guckes wrote:
> * Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-22 01:40]:
> > At least connditionals are absolutely missing
> > in mutt's config file functionality.
> .. and also missing with setup files
> for elm, pine, outlook, ...
"All mail clie
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 02:09:41:PM -0700 Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
> Care to give some examples?
if [ muttversion != "1.5.0" ]; then
source ~/.mutt/setup/nntp
fi
But you're right, this one may be done with a bash script. But - to me -
it looks ugly havin a good mail client and some sort
Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> > I don't understand why mutt so desperately needs a scripting language.
>
> I wasn't saying it does.
Sorry, I didn't mean _you_ were saying that, but some people have and I
didn't get why.
> > What's wrong with the backtick evaluation that the .muttrc already has?
On Sun 24-Mar-2002 at 02:09:41PM -0700, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
>
> I can't think of anything that can be done with a scripting language
> built into the .muttrc that can't be done with a bash script being
> evaluated with backticks inside the regular .muttrc. (but then again,
> I haven't put _t
At 4:09 PM EST on March 24 Rob 'Feztaa' Park sent off:
> Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> > If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, then
> > this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that's bloated, and
> > which one would we use?" thread would probably recur les
* Rob 'Feztaa' Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-24 14:09:41 -0700]:
> Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> > If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, then
> > this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that's bloated, and
> > which one would we use?" thread would proba
--KdquIMZPjGJQvRdI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alas! Rob Reid spake thus:
> If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, =
then
> this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that
begin quoting what Rob Reid said on Sun, Mar 24, 2002 at 03:01:35PM -0500:
>
> If mutt could pass variables like the current folder to the environment, then
> this "mutt needs a scripting language, but no, that's bloated, and
> which one would we use?" thread would probably recur less frequently
At 8:50 AM EST on March 24 Sven Guckes sent off:
> * Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-22 01:40]:
> > At least connditionals are absolutely missing
> > in mutt's config file functionality.
>
> . and also missing with setup files
> for elm, pine, outlook, ..
>
> Btw: which mailers *have*
* Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-22 01:40]:
> At least connditionals are absolutely missing
> in mutt's config file functionality.
.. and also missing with setup files
for elm, pine, outlook, ...
Btw: which mailers *have* a "setup language"?
ok - emacs. any else?
Sven
19 matches
Mail list logo
