[Partial solution: how to warn about a possible BCC field] (was: warn about a BCC field)

[Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es>]

>>> "Lars" == Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

   > Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es> writes:
   >> How do I do that? I mean which function can the article buffer and
   >> extract the information for the TO and CC fields?

   > (message-fetch-field "From"), for instance.

Thanks. I thought how to implement this.

    -  first the question is warn or change. Change would mean to kill
       all CC fields, which I consider as to much, in case the message
       comes from a mailing list.

    -  so a warning seems appropriate, (although Adam is right in
       pointing out that maybe you would automatically say yes.) 

    -  The issue is then that the function you propose works well in an
       article buffer, but I can't get it to work in a summary buffer.

    -  I could either modify the gnus-article-followup-with-original,
       but I have the feeling Lars does not like that idea.

    -  write a wrapper and bind it.

    -  use advice (which I usually try to avoid) but this time it was
       convenient.



(defun check-my-to-field ()
  "This function will be run before you execute followup. And it warns you if your email address is not 
in the To field. That warning is a safty message if you had been only on the BCC field!!"
  (interactive)
  (unless (string-match "oub@mat.ucm.es" (message-fetch-field "From"))
    (if (y-or-n-p "Warning: Followup? but you are not on the TO field, proceed?")
      (message "I hope you are sure.")
      (error
       (progn
         (message "Aborted, you are not in the To: field!!!"))))))


(defadvice gnus-article-followup-with-original (before mychecktofield activate) ;Version:1.131
  "This function will be run before you execute followup. It warns you if your email address is not in the To field. That
warning is a safty message if you had been only on the BCC field!!"
  (check-my-to-field))


So I came up with this. However what I am supposed to do in the summary
buffer?

Any thoughts??

Uwe Brauer