From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/4135 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: larsi@ifi.uio.no (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Mailing to several people. Date: 29 Nov 1995 18:55:13 +0100 Organization: Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway Sender: larsi@ifi.uio.no Message-ID: References: <9511241133.AA18431@sun-shine.hk-r.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035144927 28632 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:15:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:15:27 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miranova.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA10763 for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:46:57 -0800 Original-Received: from gymir.ifi.uio.no (4867@gymir.ifi.uio.no [129.240.80.2]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 18:55:14 +0100 Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by gymir.ifi.uio.no ; Wed, 29 Nov 1995 18:55:14 +0100 Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no In-Reply-To: steve@miranova.com's message of 24 Nov 1995 11:57:39 -0800 Original-Lines: 49 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4135 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4135 steve@miranova.com (Steven L. Baur) writes: > What Andy is describing is marking several articles, then doing a > Reply with Original on all of them. The net effect is to have one > cited article containing the contents of all the marked articles. > This isn't a good feature, it's a great feature (assuming you trim all > the attributions appropriately). Yes, it would be nice. The reason it's not documented is that I feel the current way of doing it just doesn't feel right. After fixing a couple of bugs, this is what happens in September 0.17: 1) A mail reply buffer is set up the normal way based on the first process marked article. 2) All subsequent articles are yanked with citation lines (hopefully) now inserted where they should be. (This didn't work in 0.16.) That's yucky. But it's not self-evident what should happen here. I think all From, To and Cc lines from the articles should be catenated as if replying to a single article that had quite long From, To and Cc lines: Article A: From: larsi Cc: ding To: per Article B: From: gnus-bug Cc: Steve => From: larsi, gnus-bug Cc: ding, Steve To: Per And then Gnus uses the normal methods to find out what headers it should put in the reply mail. What about References, In-Reply-To and Subject, though? -- Home is where the cat is.