On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:46:15PM +0200, Jesper Holmberg wrote:
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 18:46:15 +0200
> From: Jesper Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: resend-message (esc e) not honouring $record
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* On Tue Oct 02, Ryan Cook wrote:
> What's wrong with the copy in the 'outgoing' folder? Why does it have
> to show up in your Inboxor I guess you want the message filed into
> a specific directory?
Eh...what? I get the impression you've misunderstood something I wrote.
I just want my outgo
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 06:20:54PM +0200, Jesper Holmberg wrote:
> * On Tue Oct 02, pat wrote:
> > I'm new at this but,
> > ?? perhaps ?? cc yourself ??
>
> You're right, that is one solution to getting my own copy of what I send.
> But my problem was more specific: to automatically make mutt
* On Tue Oct 02, René Clerc wrote:
> macro index \ee "fsent_mail\n"
>
> does the trick for me.
This does indeed do the trick. I should have been able to find
that one out by myself, shouldn't I? *Blushing*
But I still think this workaround should not be needed.
Jesper
--
Jesper Ho
* On Tue Oct 02, pat wrote:
> I'm new at this but,
> ?? perhaps ?? cc yourself ??
You're right, that is one solution to getting my own copy of what I send.
But my problem was more specific: to automatically make mutt record the
fact that I've sent a new message, something it does in all cas
* Jesper Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [02-10-2001 13:38]:
| * On Mon Oct 01, Ben Reser wrote:
| > It's deliberate. Search the archives this discussion has been had
| > several times.
|
| Well, I have yet to see a good explanation why this choice has been
| made. I am also still searching for a c
I'm new at this but,
?? perhaps ?? cc yourself ??
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 01:36:40PM +0200, Jesper Holmberg wrote:
> * On Mon Oct 01, Ben Reser wrote:
> > It's deliberate. Search the archives this discussion has been had
> > several times.
>
> Well, I have yet to see a good explanation w
* On Mon Oct 01, Ben Reser wrote:
> It's deliberate. Search the archives this discussion has been had
> several times.
Well, I have yet to see a good explanation why this choice has been
made. I am also still searching for a convenient way to use an old
message as template for a new one, without
On 2001-10-01 12:12 -0700, Ben Reser wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 03:37:42PM +0200, Andre Majorel wrote:
> > When I send a new message using an older one as a template (esc
> > e), the new message is not saved to $record. Is that deliberate
> > or an overlook ?
>
> It's deliberate. Search th
On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 03:37:42PM +0200, Andre Majorel wrote:
> When I send a new message using an older one as a template (esc
> e), the new message is not saved to $record. Is that deliberate
> or an overlook ?
It's deliberate. Search the archives this discussion has been had
several times.
Thus spake Andre Majorel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> When I send a new message using an older one as a template (esc e),
> the new message is not saved to $record. Is that deliberate or an
> overlook ?
Yeah, I've noticed that with both mbox and IMAP setups in Mutt.
--
| Justin R. Miller / [EMAIL PR
Ben Reser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 24 Oct 2000:
> Depends on what you're using the resend feature for. If you're resending a
> message that you already sent it should already be in your Fcc and what's the
> point of adding it again?
True, but in that case you can delete the Fcc from the
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 02:25:22PM +0300, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
> You're missing that there's no default Fcc value provided with
> resend-message. This is certainly something I think should be changed,
> it could even be called a bug.
>
> So: There is no Fcc unless you remember to manually add o
* On Tuesday, October 24, Byrial Jensen wrote:
> > Not: macro generic \eu "f=sentmail"
>
> This should in theory work if you have remembered to remove the
> default key bindings for u in the various menus which
> otherwise will take precedence over the generic definition.
No, I don't have any
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 20:48:31 +0200, Jesper Holmberg wrote:
> * On Tuesday, October 24, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
> > You're missing that there's no default Fcc value provided with
> > resend-message. This is certainly something I think should be changed,
> > it could even be called a bug.
>
> He
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 08:48:31PM +0200, Jesper Holmberg muttered:
> * On Tuesday, October 24, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
> > You're missing that there's no default Fcc value provided with
> > resend-message. This is certainly something I think should be changed,
> > it could even be called a bug.
>
* On Tuesday, October 24, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
> You're missing that there's no default Fcc value provided with
> resend-message. This is certainly something I think should be changed,
> it could even be called a bug.
Hey, a mutt bug, I didn't think those existed! Anyway, I've been
trying to so
Jesper Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 24 Oct 2000:
> So: what I would have expected to happen is that the newly sent
> message be saved to my out-mailbox, since it is in effect a new
> message sent from me.
>
> What am I missing?
You're missing that there's no default Fcc value prov
-kevin- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It also seems to preserve the date of the original email, instead of
> giving it a new date. Yes, 'Date:' is correct but the 'From' line
> without a colon contains the date of the original email, which happens
> to be what tagging by date looks at.
Not quit
-kevin- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Thu, 01 Jun 2000:
> In short, my preference would be that if you send a message,
> regarless of its origin, it should be treated as a new message, as
> though composed in the usual manner.
I don't know about the date stuff, but here's an untested patch for
mak
On 00-05-26 10:41, -kevin- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Short:
> I notice that when I 'resend-message' (e) that it doesn't get
> copied to my 'sent' folder.
Additional Note:
It also seems to preserve the date of the original email, instead
of giving it a new date. Yes, 'Date:' is correct but
On Fri, May 26, 2000 at 09:32:20PM +0300, Mikko Hänninen wrote:
> But yes, there should be an option as to whether resend-message
> will default to Fcc'ing or not -- or if there's no option, the
> default should be yes.
ACK. This bite me several days ago :-(((
Best regards,
Daniel
PGP signatu
-kevin- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Fri, 26 May 2000:
> I notice that when I 'resend-message' (e) that it doesn't get
> copied to my 'sent' folder.
I think that this is only because resend-message doesn't fill the Fcc
header by default. If you add a folder in there, it'll work...
But yes, ther
* David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mon Mar 27 13:58 -0500:
> % Why does resend-message (ESC-e) not respect $copy? Presumably if
> % $copy is set, one wants a copy saved, of all messages sent.
>
> While I accept your argument, I think that the general premise is that
> you already have a copy of th
David T-G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Mon, 27 Mar 2000:
> While I accept your argument, I think that the general premise is that
> you already have a copy of the message (since you're resending it) and
> you're not making any changes (like adding the recipient to the headers)
> and so a copy woul
Patrick --
...and then Patrick Walsh said...
% Why does resend-message (ESC-e) not respect $copy? Presumably if
% $copy is set, one wants a copy saved, of all messages sent.
While I accept your argument, I think that the general premise is that
you already have a copy of the message (since you'
26 matches
Mail list logo
