message-utils.el: some remarks

message-utils.el: some remarks

[Kai Großjohann]

I think that message-utils are quite nice, but I do have some minor
remarks.

* The filename could be shorter, to comply with whatever rule we have
  for filenames.  Maybe mess-util.el or messutil.el?

* There should be default keybindings for all them functions, as well
  as menu entries.  The commentary at the beginning of the file has a
  menu structure; the keys cannot be used because C-c <letter> is
  reserved for the user.

* Should message-strip-subject-was be added to message-setup-hook by
  default, as suggested by the commentary?

Or should the contents of message-utils.el be moved to message.el, as
suggested there?  I'm not sure about this.

kai
-- 
~/.signature is: umop 3p!sdn    (Frank Nobis)

Re: message-utils.el: some remarks

[Josh Huber]

Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:

> * The filename could be shorter, to comply with whatever rule we
>   have for filenames.  Maybe mess-util.el or messutil.el?

Is there a rule for filenames?  Personally, I'd rather keep the longer
name than rename it to something which isn't as clear.

> * There should be default keybindings for all them functions, as
>   well as menu entries.  The commentary at the beginning of the file
>   has a menu structure; the keys cannot be used because C-c <letter>
>   is reserved for the user.

Yeah, that would be very nice.  Actually I hadn't even looked in that
file until now -- it has some handy functions!  Perhaps my
message-to-list-only would belong in there instead of in the
message.el propper.  (plug: C-c C-l in message mode is cool! ;)

> * Should message-strip-subject-was be added to message-setup-hook by
>   default, as suggested by the commentary?

I think it should be.  If anything, we should also have a default
keybinding for the subject change function.  that's pretty handy,
IMHO.

> Or should the contents of message-utils.el be moved to message.el,
> as suggested there?  I'm not sure about this.

I'd rather keep them separate, but that's just me.

-- 
Josh Huber

Re: message-utils.el: some remarks

[Simon Josefsson]

Josh Huber <huber@alum.wpi.edu> writes:

> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
>> * The filename could be shorter, to comply with whatever rule we
>>   have for filenames.  Maybe mess-util.el or messutil.el?
>
> Is there a rule for filenames?  Personally, I'd rather keep the longer
> name than rename it to something which isn't as clear.

I think filenames are supposed to be unique when truncated into 8+3.

Re: message-utils.el: some remarks

[Reiner Steib]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 715 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 07 2002, Kai Großjohann wrote:

> * Should message-strip-subject-was be added to message-setup-hook by
>   default, as suggested by the commentary?

Some months ago there was a discussion in de.comm.software.newsreader
(german) about false positives concerning this:

,----
| From: Michael Schierl <schierlm-usenet@gmx.de>
| Newsgroups: de.comm.software.newsreader
| Subject: Wer schneidet das falsche " (was:" ab? (wenn auch eine Klammer kommt) (was: '(was: ...)' ebenso festgelegt wie 'Re: '?)
| Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 22:53:46 +0100
| Message-ID: <a7qqpd$ncec2$2@ID-39741.news.dfncis.de>
`----

Therefore I've added the possibility for a confirmation before
changing the subject:


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: optional confirmation to message-strip-subject-was --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1173 bytes --]

--- message-utils.orig.el	Fri Jun  7 15:47:29 2002
+++ message-utils.el	Fri Jun  7 17:02:01 2002
@@ -128,6 +128,12 @@
   :group 'message-various
   :type 'regexp)
 
+(defcustom message-strip-subject-was-confirm nil
+  "When non-nil `message-strip-subject-was' will ask for a confirmation
+before stripping `message-subject-was-regexp' from subject."
+  :type 'boolean
+  :group 'message-various)
+
 ;;;###autoload
 (defun message-strip-subject-was ()
   "Remove trailing \"(Was: <old subject>)\" from subject lines."
@@ -137,11 +143,14 @@
     (cond (subject
 	   (setq pos (or (string-match message-subject-was-regexp subject) 0))
 	   (cond ((> pos 0)
-		  (message-goto-subject)
-		  (message-delete-line)
-		  (insert (concat "Subject: "
-				  (substring subject 0 pos) "\n")))))))
-    (widen))
+		  (when (or (null message-strip-subject-was-confirm)
+			    (yes-or-no-p
+			     "Strip `(was: <old subject>)' in subject? "))
+		    (message-goto-subject)
+		    (message-delete-line)
+		    (insert (concat "Subject: "
+				    (substring subject 0 pos) "\n"))))))))
+  (widen))
 
 ;;; Suggested by Jonas Steverud  @  www.dtek.chalmers.se/~d4jonas/
 ;;;###autoload

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 470 bytes --]


But I think it would be better to allow 'always (or nil), 'ask and
'never for `message-strip-subject-was-confirm'.

> Or should the contents of message-utils.el be moved to message.el, as
> suggested there?  I'm not sure about this.

Holger suggested to integrate `message-strip-subject-was' in the
function and _not_ call it as a hook afterwards:
news:<whn0x6ulbj.fsf@ipanema.coling.uni-freiburg.de>

Bye, Reiner.

PS: There's another typo in the commentary section:


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #4: typo X-No-Archive --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 539 bytes --]

--- message-utils.orig.el	Fri Jun  7 15:47:29 2002
+++ message-utils.el	Fri Jun  7 17:03:11 2002
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
 ;;      as something somebody else has created,
 ;;    * change Subject: header and add (was: <old subject>)
 ;;    * strip (was: <old subject>) from Subject: headers
-;;    * add a X-No-Archieve: Yes header and a note in the body
+;;    * add a X-No-Archive: Yes header and a note in the body
 ;;    * a function for cross-post and followup-to messages
 ;;    * replace To: header with contents of Cc: or Bcc: header.
 ;;

[-- Attachment #5: Type: text/plain, Size: 102 bytes --]

-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- PGP key available via WWW   http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: message-utils.el: some remarks

[Kai Großjohann]

Josh Huber <huber@alum.wpi.edu> writes:

> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
>> * The filename could be shorter, to comply with whatever rule we
>>   have for filenames.  Maybe mess-util.el or messutil.el?
>
> Is there a rule for filenames?  Personally, I'd rather keep the longer
> name than rename it to something which isn't as clear.

Consistence is also important.

kai
-- 
~/.signature is: umop 3p!sdn    (Frank Nobis)

Re: message-utils.el: some remarks

[David Kågedal]

Josh Huber <huber@alum.wpi.edu> writes:

> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
>> * The filename could be shorter, to comply with whatever rule we
>>   have for filenames.  Maybe mess-util.el or messutil.el?
>
> Is there a rule for filenames?  Personally, I'd rather keep the longer
> name than rename it to something which isn't as clear.

There used to be a 14-character-plus-extension rule that RMS
enforced.  I don't know if it's still in effect.

-- 
David Kågedal