[sgnus-0.89] compose two messages simultaneously?

[sgnus-0.89] compose two messages simultaneously?

[Mark Borges]

Is it possible in sgnus to compose two messages at the same time?

Suppose I'm writing a lengthy diatribe, get bored, read some other
news, see something that begs for a one-word reply and want to post a
quick reply. Right now it appears I have to finish what I'm doing, or
erase the current message. OK, I don't really erase it, I copy it ot
*scratch*, do the quick reply, then reply (again) to the original
article and insert the *scratch* buffer.

But that's ugly, to say the least. So I must either be doing it the
wrong way, or we aren't supposed to do this very often.

I know this functionality was what the draft concept was for, but
that's gone now, right? Would it be a simple (and safe) thing to put
in the ability for message mode to use another buffer, e.g.,
`*message* <2>'?

-- 
  -mb-

Re: [sgnus-0.89] compose two messages simultaneously?

[Andrew Eskilsson]

/ Mark Borges <mdb@cdc.noaa.gov> wrote:
| 
| I know this functionality was what the draft concept was for, but
| that's gone now, right? Would it be a simple (and safe) thing to put
| in the ability for message mode to use another buffer, e.g.,
| `*message* <2>'?

Hopefully it is on its way back in Red (?), at the moment I use M-x
rename-uniquely if I want to compose two mails.

	/andy

-- 
 Don't walk in front of me, I might be unable to follow you.
 Don't walk after me, I might be unable to lead you.
 Just walk by my side and be my friend.

Re: [sgnus-0.89] compose two messages simultaneously?

[Jack Vinson]

>>>>> "mb" == Mark D Borges <Mark> writes:

mb> Is it possible in sgnus to compose two messages at the same time?
mb> Suppose I'm writing a lengthy diatribe, get bored, read some other
mb> news, see something that begs for a one-word reply and want to post a
mb> quick reply. Right now it appears I have to finish what I'm doing, or
mb> erase the current message. OK, I don't really erase it, I copy it ot
mb> *scratch*, do the quick reply, then reply (again) to the original
mb> article and insert the *scratch* buffer.

Andy Eskilsson already mentioned using M-x rename-uniquely.  It will rename
to something list "*mail message*<2>" which I don't particularly like.
Below is a take on mail/news buffer renaming that I worked out with a couple
other people.  I then bind it to C-c C-r, to provide an easy way to rename
the buffer.  The result is a buffer name "*message* recipient@some.where.net".


(defun message-rename-buffer (&optional enter-string)
  "Rename the *message* buffer to \"*message* RECIPIENT\".  If the function is
run with a prefix, it will ask for a new buffer name, rather than giving
an automatic name."
  (interactive "Pbuffer name: ")
  (save-excursion
    (save-restriction
      (goto-char (point-min))
      (narrow-to-region (point) 
			(search-forward mail-header-separator nil 'end))
      (let* ((mail-to (if (message-news-p) (mail-fetch-field "Newsgroups")
			(mail-fetch-field "To")))
	     (mail-trimmed-to
	      (if (string-match "," mail-to)
		  (concat (substring mail-to 0 (match-beginning 0)) ", ...")
		mail-to))
	     (name-default (concat "*message* " mail-trimmed-to))
	     (name (if enter-string
		       (read-string "New buffer name: " name-default)
		     name-default)))
	(rename-buffer name t)))))

(define-key message-mode-map "\C-c\C-r" 'message-rename-buffer)

-- 
Jack Vinson                       jvinson@cheux.ecs.umass.edu
"I Spit on Your Grave"            -- double feature at the drive-in as seen
"I Thumb Through Your Magazines"     from the Qwik-E mart

Re: [sgnus-0.89] compose two messages simultaneously?

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

	If I remember correctly, VM names the buffer something like
*reply to somebody@somewhere* (I don't remember whether it has leading
spaces) while composing the message, and after sending the message it
renames the buffer to *sent message to somebody@somwhere*.  I have
often found that extremely useful, and this should not be hard to do. 

	but then, I guess it could leave people with zillions of
 unkilled buffers (I don't seem to notice them building up, really) 

	manoj

-- "As I was walking among the fires of Hell, delighted with the
 enjoyments of Genius; which to Angels look like torment and insanity.
 I collected some of their Proverbs..."  Blake, "The Marriage of
 Heaven and Hell"
Manoj Srivastava               Systems Research Programmer, Project Pilgrim,
Phone: (413) 545-3918                A143B Lederle Graduate Research Center,
Fax:   (413) 545-1249         University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003
<srivasta@pilgrim.umass.edu> <URL:http://www.pilgrim.umass.edu/%7Esrivasta/>

Re: [sgnus-0.89] compose two messages simultaneously?

[Sudish Joseph]

Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@pilgrim.umass.edu> writes:
>       If I remember correctly, VM names the buffer something like
> *reply to somebody@somewhere* (I don't remember whether it has leading

I find this a very useful feature, too.  VM's naming convention for
old messages ("sent mail to ..." "resent mail to..." etc.) is very
intuitive and saves you the bother of thinking up a reasonable name
while using rename uniquely.

This is trivial to add, but I dunno how it will go over.  I was going
to add it to sendmail.el a long time back and stopped on seeing that
code that did something similar was already there in sendmail.el.
Here's the comment that accompanied the code:

;;; This is commented out because I found it was confusing in practice.
;;; It is easy enough to rename *mail* by hand with rename-buffer
;;; if you want to have multiple mail buffers.
;;; And then you can control which messages to save. --rms.

This was probably because the old code doesn't cleanup/reuse old
buffers (unlike VM).

>       but then, I guess it could leave people with zillions of
>  unkilled buffers (I don't seem to notice them building up, really)

VM lets you specify how many old buffers you wish to retain; it keeps
a list of all buffers it created and recycles the very oldest one when
it needs a new mail composition buffer.

-Sudish