From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/60733
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: message-cite-original and message-cite-original-without-signature
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 08:09:53 +0200
Organization: orebokech dot com
Message-ID: <873bpjej4e.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1123567822 27237 80.91.229.2 (9 Aug 2005 06:10:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 06:10:22 +0000 (UTC)
Original-X-From: ding-owner+M9264=ding+2Daccount=gmane.org@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Aug 09 08:10:15 2005
Return-path: <ding-owner+M9264=ding+2Daccount=gmane.org@lists.math.uh.edu>
Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1E2NJB-0003Br-K4
	for ding-account@gmane.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 08:09:53 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost
	([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu ident=lists)
	by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1)
	id 1E2NJA-0002vs-03
	for ding-account@gmane.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 01:09:52 -0500
Original-Received: from util2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.23])
	by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1)
	id 1E2NIu-0002vj-00
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 01:09:36 -0500
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by util2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.30)
	id 1E2NIs-0006QC-3z
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 01:09:34 -0500
Original-Received: from yeast.orebokech.com ([82.67.41.165])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1E2MMn-0004gZ-00
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 07:09:33 +0200
Original-Received: from pacem.orebokech.com (pacem.orebokech.com [192.168.1.3])
	by yeast.orebokech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68D3612CF9
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Tue,  9 Aug 2005 08:09:30 +0200 (CEST)
Original-Received: by pacem.orebokech.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 76E32523FE; Tue,  9 Aug 2005 08:09:53 +0200 (CEST)
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Face: }9mYu,e_@+e!`Z-P5kVXa3\_b:hdJ"B)ww[&=b<2=awG:GOIM</2q'*t@MNa)R`k0h1KbUu "Ek%gXCQA(?k=Uf9}qgF_x#7/+Ql\R!NJ9[Z[ky\CTYI<H(kc][?[m%*rsf!OG11|f&H[VgX;),"!N JG6IziY\~""3M
X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--)
Precedence: bulk
Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:60733
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:60733

The `message-cite-original' and `message-cite-original-without-signature'
functions are almost identical and have been since 1998.  For some
reason, they have never been merged.  Is there a good reason for this?

I'd like to merge the two in a worker function and make the original
functions just call the new function with an arg to strip the signature
or not, which would eradicate the code duplication.  I can see two
consequences:
- it would break any advice people could have on them (do we support
  this?)
- it would make m-c-o-w-s (heh) honor `mail-citation-hook' as well.

Shall I go ahead?

-- 
Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> | I used to think there is no
it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | future left at all.