Re: User interface confusion; p0.30 invokes VM?

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>]

Karl Kleinpaste <karl@jprc.com> writes:

> What is the semantic of more than 1 entry for a given type?  That is,
> there are already 4 elements for message/rfc822.  Is it simply a
> matter of looping through them in sequence, until the per-element
> usability test returns non-nil?

Yes.

> If so, isn't vm-mode always
> autoloaded, and thus isn't vm-mode always the choice made?  To phrase
> the question without the negative voice, how would one stipulate a
> different personal choice?

Well, I think the default sequence should be different, but this
structure isn't for specifying personal choice.  The user is supposed
to either put things in the .mailcap file or say things like

(add-mime-display-method "image/gif" "xv -perfect %s")

in .emacs.

(The name of the function may change, though.)

The biiig mailcap alist is for specifying defaults that may or may not 
be useful for the user.

> Since I'm using Gnus to read mail, I would like to continue to use
> Gnus to read enclosd articles which are still essentially mail.  The
> idea seems very odd, to invoke an entirely different mail-reading
> package to do what I already want using Gnus.  Something like:
> 
>       ("rfc-*822"
>        (viewer . gnus-article-prepare)
>        (type   . "message/rfc-822"))
> 
> (I haven't actually looked to see if there is any other preparatory
> work to be done, before blindly invoking gnus-article-prepare.)
> 
> I don't see why one would invoke any other possibility, from within
> Gnus -- if one wants the VM interface, one should be using VM in the
> 1st place.  No?

Yes, but mailcap.el has nothing to do with Gnus.

So there should be a `test' clause like

(and (featurep 'gnus)
     (gnus-alive-p))

for that element, and something similar for VM.

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