Re: Selected articles, replying vs. forwarding.

[larsi@ifi.uio.no (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen)]

Steve Baumgarten <sbb@panix.com> writes:

> Since we're on the topic, one or two things about digests that have
> been bugging me:
> 
>    o 'C-c C-f' doesn't create a "real" digest, i.e., an rfc1153- or
>      rfc934-compliant digest.

No, it creates an rfc(mumble)-compliant "forward" message.  (I think
the name of the rfc had something to do with "Message Encapsulation",
but that may very well be totally wrong.)

>    o 'S O m' does (it creates an good-looking rfc1153-compliant
>      digest, complete with a "Topics:" summary section at the top),
>      but it also digestifies all articles in a thread, which more
>      often than not is not what I want.
> 
> It would be wonderful to have 'S O m' just work on either the current
> article or the marked articles, as most other summary commands do.

If you mark a few articles I think you'll find that `S O m' just works
on the marked articles.  September 0.47 will use normal process/prefix
conventions even when no articles are process marked.

-- 
  "Yes.  The journey through the human heart 
     would have to wait until some other time."