Postponing messages

Postponing messages

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

The `C-c C-d' buries the current Message buffer and returns to where
you were.  Should this command also rename the buffer to something
else -- like from "*reply to Blabla*" to "*unsent reply to Blabla*"?

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: Postponing messages

[Chris Tessone]

>>>>> "Lars" == Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:

    Lars> The `C-c C-d' buries the current Message buffer and returns
    Lars> to where you were.  Should this command also rename the
    Lars> buffer to something else -- like from "*reply to Blabla*" to
    Lars> "*unsent reply to Blabla*"?

Yes, IMHO.

-- 
Chris Tessone         tessone@fnal.gov         tessone@imsa.edu
PH/sendmail SNPC        System Administration        Perl/Shell
All you need is Perl, love. Perl is all you need.
http://www.imsa.edu/~tessone/

Re: Postponing messages

[Harry Putnam]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:

> The `C-c C-d' buries the current Message buffer and returns to where
> you were.  Should this command also rename the buffer to something
> else -- like from "*reply to Blabla*" to "*unsent reply to Blabla*"?

Well, it might be worthwhile but, sent messages already indicate when
they are sent so it seems it might be redundant. If it doesn't say
`sent' you know it isn't.
-- 
Harry Putnam reader@newsguy.com  
Running Redhat Linux-5.1

Re: Postponing messages

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

Hi,

>> On 24 Oct 1998 16:53:31 -0700
>>>>> Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> said:

 Harry> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:
 >> The `C-c C-d' buries the current Message buffer and returns to
 >> where you were. Should this command also rename the buffer to
 >> something else -- like from "*reply to Blabla*" to "*unsent reply
 >> to Blabla*"?

 Harry> Well, it might be worthwhile but, sent messages already
 Harry> indicate when they are sent so it seems it might be redundant.
 Harry> If it doesn't say `sent' you know it isn't.

I second this. Mostly I don't explicitly bury a message buffer, it
rather gets buried by other work (me loading files, etc.). So I would
end with buried "*reply foobar*" and "*unsent reply quuxbaz*" buffers, 
the only difference being that I rememberd to do C-c C-d on quuxbaz.

OTOH, I'd like message buffers to have the same prefix (now they have
"*reply" or "*followup" and I usually can't remember which one).
Perhaps these buffers could be called "*unsent bla*" right from the
start. You can do "C-x b *unsent TAB" then to see all messages hanging 
in limbo right now.

	Robbe

-- 
Robert Bihlmeyer	reads: Deutsch, English, MIME, Latin-1, NO SPAM!
<robbe@orcus.priv.at>	<http://stud2.tuwien.ac.at/~e9426626/sig.html>

Re: Postponing messages

[Dan Christensen]

Robert Bihlmeyer <e9426626@stud2.tuwien.ac.at> writes:
> OTOH, I'd like message buffers to have the same prefix (now they have
> "*reply" or "*followup" and I usually can't remember which one).
> Perhaps these buffers could be called "*unsent bla*" right from the
> start. You can do "C-x b *unsent TAB" then to see all messages hanging 
> in limbo right now.

I would also like all messages to have the same prefix.  I often
can't remember whether it's a "reply" or a "wide reply" or a "followup"
or just "mail".

Dan

-- 
Dan Christensen
jdc@math.jhu.edu

Re: Postponing messages

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Dan Christensen <jdc@chow.mat.jhu.edu> writes:

> I would also like all messages to have the same prefix.  I often
> can't remember whether it's a "reply" or a "wide reply" or a "followup"
> or just "mail".

This makes sense, but I don't know whether it's worthwhile to change
this at this point.  People must have gotten used to the current
naming scheme by now...

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: Postponing messages

[Lee Willis]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Dan Christensen <jdc@chow.mat.jhu.edu> writes:
> 
> This makes sense, but I don't know whether it's worthwhile to change
> this at this point.  People must have gotten used to the current
> naming scheme by now...

But surely just because people are used to it doesn't mean that it's
right?
Since we're in a new development cycle thang it would make sense to
change it here (If anywhere ...). Perhaps have a toggle so that people
can choose which naming scheme they want?

Lee.
-- 
I was doing object-oriented assembly at 1 year old ...  
For some reason my mom insists on calling it "Playing with blocks"

Re: Postponing messages

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Lee Willis <lee@gbdirect.co.uk> writes:

> But surely just because people are used to it doesn't mean that it's
> right?

If people are used to something, the gains that are made in changing
something must be substantial.  I don't think changing the naming
scheme of the Message buffers is a substantial gain.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: Postponing messages

[Lee Willis]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Lee Willis <lee@gbdirect.co.uk> writes:
> 
> > But surely just because people are used to it doesn't mean that it's
> > right?
> 
> If people are used to something, the gains that are made in changing
> something must be substantial.

Unless the change is backwards-compatible. Ie people that have no need
to change don't, whereas new users can use the new method, as can people
who would find it more useful ...

Lee.
-- 
I was doing object-oriented assembly at 1 year old ...  
For some reason my mom insists on calling it "Playing with blocks"

Re: Postponing messages

[Hrvoje Niksic]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> Dan Christensen <jdc@chow.mat.jhu.edu> writes:
> 
> > I would also like all messages to have the same prefix.  I often
> > can't remember whether it's a "reply" or a "wide reply" or a "followup"
> > or just "mail".
> 
> This makes sense, but I don't know whether it's worthwhile to change
> this at this point.  People must have gotten used to the current
> naming scheme by now...

I, for one, did -- I like the current naming of the buffers.  The only
thing I would like added is for the postponed buffers to be named
thusly.

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
The end of the world is coming...  SAVE YOUR BUFFERS!

Re: Postponing messages

[Chris Tessone]

>>>>> "Hrvoje" == Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> writes:

    Hrvoje> I, for one, did -- I like the current naming of the
    Hrvoje> buffers.  The only thing I would like added is for the
    Hrvoje> postponed buffers to be named thusly.

Yup. Same here. I suppose that having something like:

(setq gnus-buffers-naming 'classic)
or
(setq gnus-buffers-naming 'newage)

would be okay, with the former doing the current way of naming buffers 
and the latter naming them like (perhaps):

*mail to Bob (sent)*
*mail to Bob (sent wide reply)*
*mail to Bob (sent reply)*

etc.

Chris

-- 
But I installed the *last* dc-like program for Linux that we didn't install!

Re: Postponing messages

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Chris Tessone <tessone@imsa.edu> writes:

> Yup. Same here. I suppose that having something like:
> 
> (setq gnus-buffers-naming 'classic)
> or
> (setq gnus-buffers-naming 'newage)

Ok; I've now extended message-generate-new-buffers to have `unique'
and `unsent' as values.  Defaults to the current behavior.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen

Re: Postponing messages

[Hallvard B Furuseth]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:

> The `C-c C-d' buries the current Message buffer and returns to where
> you were.  Should this command also rename the buffer to something
> else -- like from "*reply to Blabla*" to "*unsent reply to Blabla*"?

That reminds me: How do I prevent Gnus from renaming message buffers
when I send the message? :-)
I'd rather have "Sent" or something in minor-mode-alist.

-- 
Hallvard

Re: Postponing messages

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen]

Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no> writes:

> That reminds me: How do I prevent Gnus from renaming message buffers
> when I send the message? :-)

(setq message-send-rename-function 'ignore)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen