>>>>> Nils Ackermann wrote:

> On second thought it appears to me that `message-disassociate-draft'
> shouldn't rely on `nnmh-request-expire-articles' to delete the mail
> from the drafts group.  It should just delete it.  Is there any deep
> reason for this choice?

I agree that `message-disassociate-draft' always deletes a draft
backup since it differs from a normal message, i.e., it has a
header separator, etc.  But `nndraft-request-expire-articles',
that uses `nnmh-request-expire-articles', is easy to use because
it knows what draft to be deleted, I think.  A corner-cutting way
is: