From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/88199 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: message-simplify-subject too coupled with reply (and not extensible) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:17:35 -0700 Message-ID: <878t2gzn80.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87zhux7u4z.fsf@portable.galex-713.eu> <87k1m1zedm.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87sh0pvxi0.fsf@portable.galex-713.eu> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1540833401 27888 195.159.176.226 (29 Oct 2018 17:16:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 17:16:41 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M36413@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Oct 29 18:16:37 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.208]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gHB9Y-00079Y-M1 for ding-account@gmane.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:16:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBAs-00050l-Fn; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:17:58 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBAj-0004y1-1I for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:17:49 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBAh-0002nS-6K for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:17:48 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (helo=blaine.gmane.org) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gHBAf-0000Ld-Td for ding@gnus.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:17:45 +0100 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gHB8Y-000696-17 for ding@gnus.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:15:34 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 86 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:NNKhT240mm02nts3ndlawKPDdLw= X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:88199 Archived-At: "Garreau, Alexandre" writes: > On 2018/10/28 at 19:16, Eric Abrahamsen wrote: >> "Garreau, Alexandre" writes: >>> But the main problem is, as this function call manually each of these >>> four functions, in the special case of `message-strip-subject-re', it >>> removes excedentary “Re:”… and add a new one! so in the end, >>> `message-reply' doesn’t do that: that fills terribly wrong. >>> `message-reply' should add a “Re:” (that’s the least expectable from it, >>> it’s confusing it is not it that does it), and >>> `message-simplify-subject' should do what its name says, so that to be >>> really useful: simplify subject, not prepare it for another different >>> function (namely, `message-reply')! >> >> I'm less certain about this. It's one of those cases where probably no >> one remembers why it is the way it is, and no one wants to touch it >> because who knows how things might suddenly break. > > I’m pretty sure el-search can be used so that to quickly check how is > it: I checked in all gnus, and the symbol `gnus-simplify-subject' is > only used in `message-reply'. So unless you do strange stuff with > symbol names twiddling or other complex stuff (I believe you are > confident enough in not abusing such things in gnus) so to get it > without naming it, it is okay. ^^ I'm convinced! >> If I were you I would report two separate bugs, so that the first had >> a better chance of being accepted. > > These are separate problems anyway. Right. [...] >>> Then, `message-reply' should replace “(message-simplify-subject >>> subject)” with “(concat "Re: " (message-simplify-subject subject))”, and >>> also, `message-strip-list-identifiers should get a “unless (equal >>> gnus-list-identifiers "")” around the body of its outer `let' (not >>> mandatory, but otherwise `message-strip-list-identifiers' might remove a >>> “Re:”, what `message-strip-subject-re' should do, even if it wasn’t >>> asked by the user by being put in `message-simplify-subject-functions'). >> >> And `message-strip-subject-trailing-was' already checks >> `message-subject-trailing-was-query', so the extra check there is >> redundant, which would mean `message-simplify-subject' really could just >> be a simple reduction function. > > “there” where? sorry I don’t understand the relationship with the > preceding quoted text. Sorry, that wasn't clear -- I just meant that `message-simplify-subject' currently does a few extra checks (that `message-subject-trailing-was-query' and `gnus-list-identifiers' are non-nil), but that the first check is already redundant, and the second can be made redundant by your earlier suggestion. >>> May I also suggest, for consistency, to rename >>> `message-strip-list-identifiers' to >>> `message-strip-subject-list-identifiers'. I guess it isn’t used >>> elsewhere than in message.el. >>> >>> It is also shorter, in total. >> >> I would file a couple of bug reports. > > So should I have bugreported from the beginning? Btw, do Gnus bugs > belong to bug-gnu-emacs mailing-list too? or is there something separate > about Gnus there too? I’m sometimes confused about how much tight is > Gnus to Emacs. This sort of very specific suggestion could have gone in a bug report to begin with, yes, though it doesn't matter too much. Gnus bugs are reported along with Emacs bugs. You can also use `gnus-bug' to do the report, in which case the bug will also be reported in the "Gnus package", and you can see them here: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/pkgreport.cgi?package=gnus But tbh I don't know if that's the right thing to do, since Gnus isn't its own package anymore. It used to be, but is no longer, hence the confusion. Eric