Re: Which one shall I choose?

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Erwan David]

Tim Haynes <usenet@stirfried.vegetable.org.uk> writes:

> Mutt is a pager adapted for mbox+mh format. Gnus is a spool-manipulation
> system with choice of multiple backends, article manipulation and so on,
> all within the bounds of a wonderful editor.

gnus is unable to work on mailboxes which receive mail and need to
coopy the mail elsewhaere. It is impossible to keep mail in the
system spool when you use gne. Moreover, gnus is a *news* reader and I
totally disaggree with the dic saying you read mail like you read
news. It may be true for some people, but in my case it is tottally
false.

-- 
 PR: Le serveur (de news) de PacWan est en panne depuis le mois de juillet !
 AT: A mon avis ils vont finir par s'en apercevoir, mais il risque de manquer
 des articles.
 -+- in: Guide du Cabaliste Usenet - La Cabale se propage (mal) -+-

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[those who know me have no need of my name]

in gnu.emacs.gnus i read:

>The impression so far I have is that Gnus is big and complex while
>Mutt is small 

they both `work' just fine.  whether one is more appropriate for you
depends on a number of factors, most of them so subjective that it can be
difficult to judge from discussion.  if they are both options i suggest
that you use gnus for a while (a week or more), then mutt (if you haven't
already) -- and i mean give it a real try, don't try forcing mutt to behave
as gnus does nor gnus as mutt, just use them and see what you like.

-- 
bringing you boring signatures for 17 years

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Josh Huber]

Rocco Rutte <s1118644@mail.inf.tu-dresden.de> writes:

>>    And adaptive scoring means that Gnus tells me what I
>>    like to read and sorts the interesting stuff out for me
>>    to some extent.
>
> Good for you, but I like to decide, what I want to read. I'm
> old enough to make decission on my own.

Well, it is an option after all. (of course)

>> 3. It is horrifyingly configurable!  Sone believe that
>>    fiddling with .gnus is an addiction.
>
> Good for you, too. I want software to work. And yes, I've tested
> Emacs and Gnus on my P90 working machine. So I better stayed with
> mutt and vim.

Who doesn't want software to work?  If my machine was a P90 I'd use
mutt as well -- but it's not.  I used to use mutt, but I got tired of
being restricted by the configuration.  Being able to write elisp
functions in my config file is what drew me to Gnus -- finally I was
able to configure things they way I wanted ;)

> Such comparisons are always stupid since there's always only one
> true answer...

Which is what?  use what you like?

-- 
Josh Huber

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Juha Siltala]

On Wed, 05 Jun 2002 11:10:23 -0400, Josh Huber <huber@alum.wpi.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Such comparisons are always stupid since there's always only one
>> true answer...
> 
> Which is what?  use what you like?
> 
No, dummy. The one true answer to all computing related problems is emacs.
What you like is irrelevant =)

-- 
Juha Siltala

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[those who know me have no need of my name]

in gnu.emacs.gnus i read:

>i'm not sure off-hand how you'd configure mutt to show only unread 
[messages]
>-- i suspect it's possible, but i've never considered trying it.

duh -- a hook running `L~N'.

-- 
bringing you boring signatures for 17 years

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Michał Kurowski]

In comp.mail.mutt A. L. Meyers <nospam.look@replyto.because.this.is.invalid> wrote:
> IMHO and experience gnus has the advantages of seamless integration in
> the Emacs computing environment. And of doing news and mail in an
> integrated way. Use mutt mostly when I have messed up my emacs/gnus
> configuration. ;-)

> Whether one appreciates the emacs environment is another issue.

I appreciate emacs environment a lot  and I use it as my primary *editor* but
I would say - I don't have my linux to end up as a lisp programmer
;-).

I've got to recommend procmail ( nobody mentioned it ) - this the
definitive  end of all scoring/sorting problems - and it works transparently !

Just a straight unix attitude - use a right tool for your tasks ;-).

-- 
Michal Kurowski
<michal@poczta.gazeta.pl> LocalWords:  Michal Kurowski

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Josh Huber]

=?Latin-2?Q?Micha=B3?= Kurowski <mkur@poczta.gazeta.pl> writes:

> I've got to recommend procmail ( nobody mentioned it ) - this the
> definitive end of all scoring/sorting problems - and it works
> transparently !
>
> Just a straight unix attitude - use a right tool for your tasks ;-).

Indeed, thought I _really_ like Gnus' splitting and scoring.  Lets you
easily do things like split-with-parent (make replies to messages go
in the same group as their parents were sorted).

ttyl,

-- 
Josh Huber

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Michael Slass]

"Robin S. Socha" <robin-dated-1023569331.2b0c7d@socha.net> writes:

>* Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> writes:
>> Tim Haynes <usenet@stirfried.vegetable.org.uk> writes:
>> 
>>> Mutt is a pager adapted for mbox+mh format. Gnus is a
>>> spool-manipulation system with choice of multiple backends, article
>>> manipulation and so on,  all within the bounds of a wonderful editor.
>> 
>> gnus is unable to work on mailboxes which receive mail and need to
>> coopy the mail elsewhaere. 
>
>Parse error.
>
>> It is impossible to keep mail in the system spool when you use
>> gne. 
>
>Parse error.
>
>> Moreover, gnus is a *news* reader 
>
>Wrong.
>
>> and I totally disaggree with the dic saying you read mail like you read
>> news. 
>
>Noone forces you to.
>
>> It may be true for some people, but in my case it is tottally false.
>
>Irrelevant. Get sober, get a clue, then come back.
>
>http://my.gnus.org/Members/robin/Doc/howto_advocacy/


A bit more civility is appropriate for a public forum.

-- 
Mike Slass

,----                       WRQ, Inc.
|
| We specialize in integration software and services that let you
| quickly adapt your host-intensive environment to meet new business
| needs.
`----

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Tim Hammerquist]

Robin S. Socha graced us by uttering:
[ snip ]
> Because it sucks dick?

This is an excellent tactic to solve discussions, I think.  A little
mud-flinging always convinces your audience you're right.

> > Just a straight unix attitude - use a right tool for your tasks ;-).
> 
> The straight Unix attitude is to use tools that work. That rules out
> procmail.

I've heard something different entirely: "Do one thing and do it well."

But to look at something a little more definitive
<http://hebb.cis.uoguelph.ca/~dave/27320/new/unixphil.html>, the nine
"tenets" of the Unix Philosophy:

   1. small is beautiful
   2. make each program do one thing well
   3. build a prototype as soon as possible
   4. choose portability over efficiency
   5. store numerical data in flat files
   6. use software leverage to your advantage
   7. use shell scripts to increase leverage and portability
   8. avoid captive user interfaces
   9. make every program a filter

(1) doesn't say much for Emacs, but (4) certainly speaks better of Emacs
than mutt (see other discussion)

More specifically, a better mantra would be "Use what works... for you."
The practice of telling others what they should use despite their wishes
seems decisively Redmond-esqe.  MDAs, MTAs, MUAs are all to be
modular in a unix system.

Tim Hammerquist
-- 
Obviously I was either onto something, or on something.
    -- Larry Wall on the creation of Perl

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Erwan David]

Reiner Steib <4uce.02.r.steib@gmx.net> writes:

> On Thu, Jun 06 2002, Erwan David wrote:
>
>> [...] And even as a newsreader it is not so good :
>
>> * total mess with the mix between ISO-8859-1 and ISO-8859-15
>>   characters
>
> With Emacs 21.1 and Gnus 5.9 (or later) this can easily be fixed.
> Search the archives for ucs-tables.el.

I use Xemacs, not emacs. And gnus will encode in QP almost one of the
charset... And I do not know for 5.9 (Emacs specific thing) but 5.8
does not know the iso-8859-15 charset...

> [...]
>> * totally broken when primary server does not answer
>
> `M-x gnus-no-server RET' isn't b0rked for me.

  Yes and you get *no* server. I want all server except the ones which
do not answer. And I cannot. They're not evenin the "Servers" buffer...

>> * Obliges to use its mail module for answering by mail instead of
>>   giving the possibility to use *my* choice of mailer.
>
> Of course you can choose your mailer. Just add appropriate lisp-code
> to your ~/.gnus. ;-) I even saw lisp-code to edit mail-messages with
> vi or vim from Gnus. *brrr*

Why ?

-- 
 J'utilise Netscape Mail pour récupérer mes mails, sur une config PC.
 Ma question est la suivante : est-ce normal qu'il mette 3 secondes pour
 ne rien trouver
 -+- JN in NPC : et un, et deux, et trois... ZERO -+-

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Kai Großjohann]

Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> writes:

> Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann) writes:
>
>> Strictly speaking, this is not a Gnus issue, it's an Emacs issue.
>
> Yes and no. Because I can tell gnus to not QP encode one charset in
> headers, but it will encode the common part if it thinks it is from
> the other charset...

Whee.  Hm.

>>> * totally broken when primary server does not answer
>>
>> I can just hit C-g and then it will access the others.  I think.
>>
>> Maybe primary servers should be shot.  Recent Oort Gnusae offer the
>> nnnil backend which has no groups.  So all your real servers can be
>> foreign or secondary.
>
> Then I'll loose completion on group names when composing message...

Another bug...  I'm sorry.

kai
-- 
Silence is foo!

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Robert Uhl <ruhl@4dv.net>]

Reiner Steib <4uce.02.r.steib@gmx.net> writes:
>
> > * totally broken when primary server does not answer
> 
> `M-x gnus-no-server RET' isn't b0rked for me.

The fact that M-x gnus doesn't gracefully degrade is itself broken.
It's like having a configuration option dont-screw-up set to nil by
default.

-- 
Robert Uhl <ruhl@4dv.net>
Crist aras!  Crist soþlice aras!

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[A. L. Meyers]

Peter Davis <pd@world.std.com> writes:

> Tim Hammerquist <tim@vegeta.ath.cx> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> I've heard something different entirely: "Do one thing and do it well."
>> 
>> But to look at something a little more definitive
>> <http://hebb.cis.uoguelph.ca/~dave/27320/new/unixphil.html>, the nine
>> "tenets" of the Unix Philosophy:
>> 
>>    1. small is beautiful
>>    2. make each program do one thing well
>>    3. build a prototype as soon as possible
>>    4. choose portability over efficiency
>>    5. store numerical data in flat files
>>    6. use software leverage to your advantage
>>    7. use shell scripts to increase leverage and portability
>>    8. avoid captive user interfaces
>>    9. make every program a filter
>
> By these tenets, MH is superior to all other mail programs.  Indeed,
> MH is far and away my choice.  However, I'm sentenced to work in a
> Windows environment, and I've never found an MH port to Windows.  I
> have this on my "to do when there's spare time" list, but so far, the
> occasion has not arisen.  If anyone know of an MH port for Windows,
> please *please* let me know.

Qmail people write that mh security is not very good. Is that true?
Both gnus and mutt work well with mh type mail directories.

Lucien
-- 
If you receive this by error, please delete it and inform the sender.
PGP Key fingerprint=F1C0 D9AE 1B18 1405 4DFA  B4CC 6DC7 FF78 C76E FB15
To Big Brother Echelon from "spook":
fissionable Serbian Noriega quiche security CIA anthrax FBI Albanian FSF 

Re: How to attach messages in Gnus (was Re: Which one shall I choose?)

[Josh Huber]

Martin Schulz <schulz@iwrmm.math.uni-karlsruhe.de> writes:

> And what is if - - while already writing the message -- it comes to
> mind that I could cite that other message?

Good question.  I usually do this manually (C-x C-b, copy, paste,
etc), but having some sort of method to do this would be nice, IMHO.

how about:

(defun gnus-reply-buffers ()
  (delete nil (mapcar
	       (lambda (b) (if (string-match
				"^*\\(wide \\)?\\(followup\\|reply\\) to"
				(buffer-name b))
			       (cons (buffer-name b) b) nil))
	       (buffer-list))))

(defun gnus-article-yank-to-other-buffer (&optional n)
  (interactive "P")
  (let* ((articles (gnus-summary-work-articles n))
	 (buffers (gnus-reply-buffers))
	 (buffer 
	  (completing-read "Buffer to yank into: "
			   buffers
			   nil nil (caar buffers))))
    (set-buffer (get-buffer buffer))
    (gnus-inews-yank-articles articles)))

While composing a message, just switch to the summary buffer and M-x
gnus-article-yank-to-other-buffer and select the buffer you want to
cite.

Warning: this is a quick hack ;)  YMMV!

ttyl,

-- 
Josh Huber

Re: How to attach messages in Gnus (was Re: Which one shall I choose?)

[Kai Großjohann]

Martin Schulz <schulz@iwrmm.math.uni-karlsruhe.de> writes:

>> > This is forward. What shall I do if I want to attach 2 messages?
>> 
>> Process-mark them (with #) and use S O m (not S o m).
>
> And what is if - - while already writing the message -- it comes to
> mind that I could cite that other message?

Oort Gnus has C-c C-M-y (message-yank-buffer) for this.  The idea:
you use C-x b to go to the summary buffer, hit g on the message you
want to cite, then use message-yank-buffer to yank the *Article*
buffer.

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

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Tim Hammerquist]

Johan Kullstam graced us by uttering:
> Tim Hammerquist <tim@vegeta.ath.cx> writes:
>> <http://hebb.cis.uoguelph.ca/~dave/27320/new/unixphil.html>, the nine
>> "tenets" of the Unix Philosophy:
>> 
>>    1. small is beautiful
>>    2. make each program do one thing well
>>    3. build a prototype as soon as possible
>>    4. choose portability over efficiency
>>    5. store numerical data in flat files
>>    6. use software leverage to your advantage
>>    7. use shell scripts to increase leverage and portability
>>    8. avoid captive user interfaces
>>    9. make every program a filter
> 
> one could say similar about a lisp environment.
> 
> 1. each lisp function is a little program.  you have *lots* of lisp
>    functions.  look, emacs is nearly an OS unto itself.  you have to
>    look at lisp functions as building blocks and resist calling the
>    bundle of everything in emacs a monolith.  you wouldn't say unix is
>    one big monolithic system.
> 
> 2. each lisp function can do one thing well.
> 
> 3. lisp is the fastest prototyping language i've used.
> 
> 4. emacs (and hence its lisp) is highly portable.  common-lisp too.
> 
> 5. lisp can store data in readable, portable, non-binary files.
>    however, unlike the usual unix half solution, it can retain
>    structure and context.  see the kludge that is XML trying to
>    demonstrate greenspun's tenth rule.
> 
> 6. gnus is the most massive leverage of software i have seen.
> 
> 7. why have shells, perl, C and crap when lisp can do it all?
> 
> 8. not sure what a captive luser interface is.
> 
> 9. every lisp function returns a value.  moreover, the value can be
>    structured.
> 
> there are more tenents of unix --

Yes, but I didn't want to get too deep into this. ;)

Your points lead to the inevitable (and pre-existing) quote:

   "Emacs is a nice OS - but it lacks a good text editor.
    That's why I am using Vim."
        -- Anonymous

=)

>> Obviously I was either onto something, or on something.
>>     -- Larry Wall on the creation of Perl
> 
> i am leaning to the latter.  a reaction against perl is what drove me
> into the arms of common-lisp.

Fair.  You're far from alone.  I personally find much to love in both
clisp and perl for completely different reasons.

My LOC, tho, for the moment is Ruby.

Tim Hammerquist
-- 
...it's fairly surprising how long a system will stay up when you remove all
the executables, most of the libraries, and trash a filesystem or two.
    -- Simon, BOFH: No Service Therefore No Denial

Re: Which one shall I choose?

[Michael Johnson]

Peter Wu (peterwu@hotmail.com):
>  Can anyone share their experience using Gnus and Mutt? What are their
>  Cons an Pros?
>  
>  I am not intended to start a war between them but would like to know
>  what I shall use. 
>  
>  The impression so far I have is that Gnus is big and complex while
>  Mutt is small and works.
>  
>  Any inputs are appreciated. Thanks.

I think you should try both. They're great programs both but no one knows
*your* preferences...

I myself choose mutt with Jed (jedmail.sl) as editor.

cheers
-- 
:: michael
[ p o m J ]  --  [http://www.bigfoot.com/~pomj]