RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Robert J. Chassell]

    ... some of us just do not know how to do it.  Could those of you
    that are using some mail client in Emacs on w32 ...

Microsoft is a corporation that endeavors to restrict both your
economic freedom and mine.  By that decision it has decided to require
either that I behave illegally or that I transfer resources to it in a
non-economic fashion.  I have not done either and cannot help you
directly.  But in GNU/Linux, here are the RMAIL and mail setting that
I specify in my .emacs file.

You might adapt these:

  ;; Specify local inbox
  (setq rmail-primary-inbox-list '("/var/mail/bob"))

  ;; Do this to get mail directly from remote and local mail boxes:
  ;;   (setq rmail-primary-inbox-list '("po:bob:fp.gnu.org" "/var/mail/bob"))
  ;;   (setq rmail-pop-password-required t)
  ;;   (setq rmail-pop-password "XXX")
  ;;   (setq rmail-preserve-inbox nil)

  ;; Set this value so that the From field is correct
  (setq mail-host-address "bob@rattlesnake.com")

  ;; You must also set `user-mail-address' so that the From field is correct.
  (setq user-mail-address "bob@rattlesnake.com")

  ;; Set the `reply-to' field for mail so people don't automatically
  ;; reply to root rather than bob when I am using root.
  (setq mail-default-reply-to "bob@rattlesnake.com")

  ;; Do not automatically delete a message after it is copied to
  ;;   another file using `o'.
  (setq rmail-delete-after-output nil)

  ;; Do not ask for confirmation when expunging
  (setq rmail-confirm-expunge nil)

  ;; Automatically display summary
  (setq rmail-display-summary t)

My mail-user-agent's value is sendmail-user-agent, which is the
default.

-- 
    Robert J. Chassell                         
    bob@rattlesnake.com                         GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
    http://www.rattlesnake.com                  http://www.teak.cc

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 8/6/05, Robert J. Chassell <bob@rattlesnake.com> wrote:
>     ... some of us just do not know how to do it.  Could those of you
>     that are using some mail client in Emacs on w32 ...
> 
> Microsoft is a corporation that endeavors to restrict both your
> economic freedom and mine.  By that decision it has decided to require
> either that I behave illegally or that I transfer resources to it in a
> non-economic fashion.  I have not done either and cannot help you
> directly.

Sorry, Robert, but this is ridiculous. Lennart asks for people who's
using an email client on w32, and you do help by saying "I don't", and
then the usual rants about Microsoft.

I know the politics of software freedom is on-topic on this list
(judging by Richard's posts). But some of us *do* use Windows, MS-DOS,
OS X and other non-free operating systems.

Speaking for myself and no one else, I strongly think that getting
political answers to technical questions, and in particular political
tirades that are not new, that won't change my stance, and which do
not add anything new to the debate is absurd.

Perhaps some day I will abandon propriety operating systems (I would
if there were a single GNU/Linux distribution I felt I was not going
to hate in a few months), but if I do, it most definitely *won't be*
because of your's (or anyone else's) rebukes. When I read paragraphs
like the one above, I feel I'm being severely patronized, as if I were
a child who doesn't know better.

Not very nice, IMO.

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Robert J. Chassell]

   Sorry, Robert, but this is ridiculous. Lennart asks for people who's
   using an email client on w32, and you do help by saying "I don't", and
   then the usual rants about Microsoft.

You give the impression that you do not care that government enforced
restrictions make it harder for Lennart to find out how to use an
email client.  You probably do not intend this, but this is the
impression you give.  I told Lennart what he could do technically.

I have helped him as much as I am allowed: which is to provide the
technical information he needs that I have the freedom to give.

   ... When I read paragraphs like the one above, I feel I'm being
   severely patronized, as if I were a child who doesn't know better.

I take that to mean that you know it is better that I and others be
restricted.  That is very much a patron telling a lessor that the
patron knows it is better that the lessor be restricted.  

Or that deep down you really did not realize that like many others I
am restricted.  It is as if you did not realize that such restrictions
require either that I behave illegally or that I transfer resources in
a non-economic fashion.

   Not very nice, IMO.

Being restricted is not nice at all.  I do not like it.

Meanwhile, as of a few minutes ago, I am still the only person who has
given technical advice that should be sufficient to Lennart.

-- 
    Robert J. Chassell                         
    bob@rattlesnake.com                         GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
    http://www.rattlesnake.com                  http://www.teak.cc

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Lennart Borgman]

Robert J. Chassell wrote:

>Microsoft is a corporation that endeavors to restrict both your
>economic freedom and mine.  By that decision it has decided to require
>either that I behave illegally or that I transfer resources to it in a
>non-economic fashion.  I have not done either and cannot help you
>directly.
>
Yes, thanks, but please do not educate me on this. I do have a lot of 
thoughts about the current situation. If you want to discuss this on an 
equal level I will be glad to but perhaps we should then find another 
form than the list. Otherwise we might just be wasting time. I might 
feel as you are offending me though I do not believe that this is 
actually your intention at all.

>  ;; Set this value so that the From field is correct
>  (setq mail-host-address "bob@rattlesnake.com")
>
>  ;; You must also set `user-mail-address' so that the From field is correct.
>  (setq user-mail-address "bob@rattlesnake.com")
>  
>
Thanks for the code. Could you give me a hint why the first should be 
set? Could that be something totally different?

For your information: Stephan Stahl send me some useful comments 
directly. I am trying to test those to see what actually work on w32 
with current CVS. What might be most interesting is IMAP and handling of 
that. I am not sure I am correct here but I got the impression that IMAP 
is not so commonly used on the unix side?

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 8/6/05, Robert J. Chassell <bob@rattlesnake.com> wrote:

> You give the impression that you do not care that government enforced
> restrictions make it harder for Lennart to find out how to use an
> email client.

You give the impression that you think that you know better than I do
what do I think or care about. Worse still, you give the clear
impression that you think that you know what's better for me, and for
all people who's decided to use Windows or other proprietary operating
systems. You (and many other people) take a political stance; that
does not make it automatically right. Maybe that's great news to you.

Perhaps a biased reading can give you that impression you get from my
message, as I've not said whether I think that you are right or wrong
in your politics; only that it is not useful to receive politics when
asked about technical questions. I'm not questioning your ideology,
only your chosen method of communication.

>    ... When I read paragraphs like the one above, I feel I'm being
>    severely patronized, as if I were a child who doesn't know better.
> 
> I take that to mean that you know it is better that I and others be
> restricted.  That is very much a patron telling a lessor that the
> patron knows it is better that the lessor be restricted.

Are you talking about free speech? Of course you can, in the broadest
sense, to answer every question with political rants. I couldn't and
wouldn't dream of making you stop. Unfortunately, if you're going to
do it, I'll have to resort to that great equalizer, the kill file, and
get rid of this kind of thing. That'll make me happy and preserve all
your rights.

> Or that deep down you really did not realize that like many others I
> am restricted.  It is as if you did not realize that such restrictions
> require either that I behave illegally or that I transfer resources in
> a non-economic fashion.

There you go again patronizing and sounding like you're two or three
steps higher...

> Meanwhile, as of a few minutes ago, I am still the only person who has
> given technical advice that should be sufficient to Lennart.

The only one? You can not know, unless you have access to private
e-mail. Technical advice? More like "I do this in a system very
different of yours, good luck trying to use it." Should suffice?
That's for Lennart to say, don't you agree?

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> only that it is not useful to receive politics when
> asked about technical questions.

probably a great many injustices occur when the decision making process
focuses purely on the technical or purely on the political.  wherever
there is choice, there is also beauty and ugliness, slack and coercion,
understanding and misunderstanding.  all these can be useful, although
perhaps only obliquely and only over time.

i am a sip of grappa from weeping over all this, so i'll stop now...

thi

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 06 Aug 2005 19:09:30 -0400, Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnu.org> wrote:

> probably a great many injustices occur when the decision making process
> focuses purely on the technical or purely on the political.

Of course.

However, I tend to assume that people on the Emacs developers' list
already knows such things, and has given some thought to the kind of
issues Robert's bringing up. We're here developing not for an "open
source" project, but for one of the flagships of the Project GNU.
Restating the issues is often pointless. Restating them when the
questions are technical is IMO almost insulting. Restating them as if
people were clueless about, that's outright insulting.

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Lennart Borgman]

Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:

>probably a great many injustices occur when the decision making process
>focuses purely on the technical or purely on the political.  wherever
>there is choice, there is also beauty and ugliness, slack and coercion,
>understanding and misunderstanding.  all these can be useful, although
>perhaps only obliquely and only over time.
>
>i am a sip of grappa from weeping over all this, so i'll stop now...
>  
>
It is absolutely not wrong to talk politics. It is absolutely not wrong 
to talk technical things. But mixing the arguments must be done very 
carefully since it easy to mix logic and feeling when it you feel 
threatened. (Of course we have better concentrate most of the times on 
the technical issues here. But personally I feel it is good to know you 
are thinking in other dimensions too.)

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Robert J. Chassell]

   >  ;; Set this value so that the From field is correct
   >  (setq mail-host-address "bob@rattlesnake.com")

   Thanks for the code. Could you give me a hint why the first should be 
   set? 

Thank you for causing me to look into `mail-host-address' more
thoroughly.  Actually, I am not sure why that expression has the user
name in it.  It has been in my .emacs file for a long time.  It is a
mistake.

The reason I set the value was that From fields have been wrong and
that string, which is the email address, has not caused me trouble.
But the documentation points out that it is only the name of the
machine.

Looking at the code in emacs/lisp/startup.el, the reason it has not
caused me trouble is that I also set `user-mail-address'.  I am going
to change `mail-host-address' to get rid of the user name.

Indeed, if you let `user-mail-address' define itself using
`mail-host-address', that variable had better be only the part of the
address after the `@'.  Otherwise, you will get a second user name and
`@' in the `user-mail-address'.

The code for `user-mail-address' is to

    (concat (user-login-name) "@" (or mail-host-address (system-name)))

or else set the `user-mail-address' variable yourself.

On my system, `(system-name)' regularly gives a name I do not want;
and when I am running as `root' or some other user, (user-login-name)
also is undesired.  So I cannot let `user-mail-address' be set
automatically.

As far as I can see, `mail-host-address' is irrelevant when
`user-mail-address' is set.  Perhaps, I should just avoid setting it
at all.

Then the variables that that I think are salient to a .emacs file and
that should be the same regardless of operating system would be:

    user-mail-address
    mail-default-reply-to

    rmail-delete-after-output
    rmail-confirm-expunge
    rmail-display-summary

    rmail-pop-password-required
    rmail-pop-password
    rmail-preserve-inbox

-- 
    Robert J. Chassell                         
    bob@rattlesnake.com                         GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
    http://www.rattlesnake.com                  http://www.teak.cc

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Robert J. Chassell]

   ... Worse still, you give the clear
   impression that you think that you know what's better for me, ...

My apologies for giving that impression.  That was not my intent.  I
am talking about what you are doing to me and to people I know well.
I do not know what you prefer.

   Are you talking about free speech? 

Only partly.  In this instance, mostly I am talking about being forced
under penalty of law to transfer resources unfairly.

-- 
    Robert J. Chassell                         
    bob@rattlesnake.com                         GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
    http://www.rattlesnake.com                  http://www.teak.cc

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 8/7/05, Robert J. Chassell <bob@rattlesnake.com> wrote:

> My apologies for giving that impression.  That was not my intent.  I
> am talking about what you are doing to me and to people I know well.
> I do not know what you prefer.

Oh, yes? So saying that I don't like political answers to technical
questions is doing something to you? Or are you referring to the fact
that I do use Windows?

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Richard M. Stallman]

    Perhaps some day I will abandon propriety operating systems (I would
    if there were a single GNU/Linux distribution I felt I was not going
    to hate in a few months), but if I do, it most definitely *won't be*
    because of your's (or anyone else's) rebukes.

Whether or not it convinces you (or any specific person) to change, it
is very important that this list not drift into an ethical slumber
where we treat the use of Windows as legitimate or normal.  We've
decided to support Emacs on Windows, and that is probably a good thing
to do, but that doesn't mean Windows is ethical.

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 8/7/05, Richard M. Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> Whether or not it convinces you (or any specific person) to change, it
> is very important that this list not drift into an ethical slumber
> where we treat the use of Windows as legitimate or normal.

I know, and I agree with you.

But, really, preaching to the choir does not serve any useful purpose.
That's what I'm saying. I usually comment or ask about Windows
questions. Do you really think that adding a paragraph like the one by
Robert at the start of every answer I receive is gonna produce any
result at all, other than increasing the levels of adrenaline in my
bloodstream and making me ignore that person's messages?

> We've
> decided to support Emacs on Windows, and that is probably a good thing
> to do, but that doesn't mean Windows is ethical.

No. But that does not make us, the people who use and work with
Windows, unethical. Our priorities are a bit different, that's all.

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Robert J. Chassell]

   ... Or are you referring to the fact that I do use Windows?

By providing resources to a government-enforced monopoly that
restricts what people I know and what I can do, you hurt me and my
friends.  I suspect you do not do much hurting and that you try to
compensate, but nonetheless, you are hurting me and my friends.  That
is why I become angry.

Technology has advanced over the past half century.  Things that you
`cannot drop on your foot', such as software programs, have become
easier to manufacture.  Indeed, they have become so easy to
manufacture that we do not refer to the duplication process as
`manufacturing'; we refer to it has `copying'.

If I worked at Toyota, it would not sound strange for me to say, `we
manufactured another car'.  But it does sound strange to say that `I
manufactured another Emacs' when I copied an instance.

Software takes many resources to write the first instance of a
program.  (And it takes many resources to buy a computer.)  But it
takes few resources to make copies.  It takes huge resources -- very
competent people, in particular -- to write and maintain Emacs.  But
it takes few resources to make another copy of Emacs -- so few
resources that I did not think twice this morning when I updated my
CVS.  Software is a `high initial/low incremental' cost good.

Law and social customs that apply to `high initial/high incremental'
cost goods should not be applied to items with low incremental costs.

But they are.

Partly this is because of social and legal inertia.  Partly this is
because people don't know a better way to fund high initial costs.
Many people do not think of companies reducing complementary costs, of
consortiums, of trade associations, of universities, of governments,
and (to go by Aristotle) of individuals' rising wealth as providing
ways to fund high initial cost actions.  And partly this is because
those who profit from charging this kind of high incremental prices
need not themselves pay the whole cost.

I wish you would help more to change laws and social customs that
apply to `high initial/low incremental' cost activities rather than
support, even just a little, inethical laws and social customs.  But I
do not know you or your conditions; only that you are hurting me and
people I know.

--
    Robert J. Chassell
    bob@rattlesnake.com                         GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
    http://www.rattlesnake.com                  http://www.teak.cc

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Lennart Borgman]

Robert J. Chassell wrote:

>Law and social customs that apply to `high initial/high incremental'
>cost goods should not be applied to items with low incremental costs.
>
>But they are.
>
>Partly this is because of social and legal inertia.  Partly this is
>because people don't know a better way to fund high initial costs.
>Many people do not think of companies reducing complementary costs, of
>consortiums, of trade associations, of universities, of governments,
>and (to go by Aristotle) of individuals' rising wealth as providing
>ways to fund high initial cost actions.  And partly this is because
>those who profit from charging this kind of high incremental prices
>need not themselves pay the whole cost.
>
>I wish you would help more to change laws and social customs that
>apply to `high initial/low incremental' cost activities rather than
>support, even just a little, inethical laws and social customs.  But I
>do not know you or your conditions; only that you are hurting me and
>people I know.
>  
>
Are you really sure that you are telling us something we have not 
thought about and discussed numerous times?
Are you really sure that you are the one of us who have penetrated this 
area most?
Are you really sure you are the one of us who have tried to change this 
most?
Are you really sure we are not working with this?
Are you really sure you are doing more than we working with this?
Are you really sure that you are not hurting us?

Could you please ask us about if we are with you or against you if that 
matters to you? You are very welcome to do that. Maybe we should save 
the list from much of this though.

Maybe you could put up a blog about this? It is important issues and I 
will do that myself in a while. Maybe you can put up a blog and send us 
the link? I would be interested and I would try to give you feedback.

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 20:51:18 +0000 (UTC)
> From: "Robert J. Chassell" <bob@rattlesnake.com>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> I wish you would help more to change laws and social customs that
> apply to `high initial/low incremental' cost activities rather than
> support, even just a little, inethical laws and social customs.

Come on, now.  We are here only to help maintain Emacs.  If you don't
want my or Juanma's help just because we happen to use MS-Windows, or
not exactly agree with your particular interpretation of ethics, just
say so, and I can assure you won't hear from me again, ever.

Now, can we please drop this off-topic discussion?  I no longer have
CPU cycles left in my brain to wade through this endless heap of $0.10
philosophy.  I didn't spend half a century (some of it in quarters
where Microsoft-style monopoly would look like the Promised Land) ---
I didn't spent all that time thinking about freedom and its merits,
and working towards it, just to find myself staring at all this
verbiage that presumes to tell me something new.

_Please_ stop treating me like a teenage who is still not sure how to
tell right from wrong.

And PLEASE let us try from now on to invest our energy in goals we all
agree to and support, instead of wasting it on looking for areas of
disagreement and then beating them to death!  Didn't you learn from
your history classes that humanity succeeds whenever we look for
cooperation between well-meaning people, and invariably fails where
we, in the name of Higher Good, strive for confrontation among them?
(Yes, it's my turn to preach ;-)

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Lennart Borgman]

Robert J. Chassell wrote:

>As far as I can see, `mail-host-address' is irrelevant when
>`user-mail-address' is set.  Perhaps, I should just avoid setting it
>at all.
>  
>
Thanks for the clarification.

>Then the variables that that I think are salient to a .emacs file and
>that should be the same regardless of operating system would be:
>
>    user-mail-address
>    mail-default-reply-to
>
>    rmail-delete-after-output
>    rmail-confirm-expunge
>    rmail-display-summary
>
>    rmail-pop-password-required
>    rmail-pop-password
>    rmail-preserve-inbox
>  
>
Thanks also for these. One point that feels mysterious when you are new 
to these is the storing. Is this the same for all different mail agents 
in Emacs?

Another mysterious point is the settings for different mail agents. The 
setting above seems to suggest that this if for RMAIL only? Is that the 
case? If not why are for example rmail-pop-password not called just 
mail-pop-password? It does not really look agent specific to me. Or does 
the different agents inherit from some common values? I would expect an 
inheritance from mail-pop-password => rmail-pop-password if the latter 
was not set. It feels natural and from a beginners point it would be 
very good.

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 8/7/05, Robert J. Chassell <bob@rattlesnake.com> wrote:

> By providing resources to a government-enforced monopoly that

[...]

> do not know you or your conditions; only that you are hurting me and
> people I know.

Thanks for not saying anything new. Again.

I think we're both ready to drop this thread.

Still, if I ever ask anything related to Windows on this list (as I
will surely do), I'd really appreciate if either you don't answer my
question, or don't include your politics into it. Consider it as a
personal plea.

Thanks,

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 8/7/05, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> (Yes, it's my turn to preach ;-)

FWIW, I like your preaching a lot.

Thanks.

(And yes, enough of this, at least from my quarters.)

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Stephan Stahl]

Hi Lennart.

Lennart Borgman said:

> Another mysterious point is the settings for different mail agents. The
> setting above seems to suggest that this if for RMAIL only? Is that the
> case? If not why are for example rmail-pop-password not called just
> mail-pop-password? It does not really look agent specific to me. Or does

>From looking at the code (M-x load-library rmail, C-h v rmail-pop-password
and clicking on "Defined in rmail") this variable is rmail specific.
With so many choices regarding mail clients in emacs its maybe best that
they are not based on a global variable.

Regards,
-- 
Stephan Stahl

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Lennart Borgman]

Stephan Stahl wrote:

>From looking at the code (M-x load-library rmail, C-h v rmail-pop-password
>and clicking on "Defined in rmail") this variable is rmail specific.
>With so many choices regarding mail clients in emacs its maybe best that
>they are not based on a global variable.
>  
>
Thanks, but I have very hard to see why a password for example should be 
specific to one of the mail agents. Why?

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> However, I tend to assume that people on the Emacs developers' list
> already knows such things

this is not guaranteed.  even if it were guaranteed, it is not
guaranteed a universal reaction to exposure to already-known things.

(the traffic on this list is public; we are just traipsing around on
stage, according to some dead writer of poetry and prose.)

it is good that you know what kinds of things you find insulting, the
trick now is to use this self-knowledge to munge what you can munge.

(give personally, but don't take it so -- less gray hair that way.)

thi

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 08 Aug 2005 08:17:05 -0400, Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnu.org> wrote:

> it is good that you know what kinds of things you find insulting, the
> trick now is to use this self-knowledge to munge what you can munge.

Perhaps I'm a bit trigger happy (this list has that effect on me
sometimes), but what you're saying dangerously treads the patronizing
border too, at least IM0. I don't entirely understand why should I be
expected to exercise restrain on my ire, and not expect too for Robert
to contain that preaching impulse of his.

Excuse me if I'm wrong. Are you developing Emacs on Windows? I think
the answer is not, which wouldn't put you on the receiving end of
Robert's rhetorics. The reason I ask is, three people who hack Emacs
on Windows (Lennart, Eli and myself) have already expressed (in wildly
different ways, of course) the feeling that Roberts diatribes are not
welcome *on technical questions*. So it's not just a matter of what I
do find insulting.

(Now, I know there are other people who hacks Emacs on Windows and
have not expressed an opinion; I'm not claiming 100% agreement here or
anything of that sort.)

Really. I would like to give this issue some rest; I just find hard to
leave "psychological counseling" like the one above pass unchallenged.
It reminds me too much of the "you forgot to take your pills" insults
the kids exchange on Usenet newsgroups.

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Robert J. Chassell]

    It is important ... Maybe you can ... send us the link?  I would
    be interested and I would try to give you feedback.

Please take a look at

        http://www.teak.cc/softfree/software-freedom.html
and 
        http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/Choice-and-Constraint.html

(and some of the other writings on the  http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/
site).

I am very interested in your comments.

-- 
    Robert J. Chassell                         
    bob@rattlesnake.com                         GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
    http://www.rattlesnake.com                  http://www.teak.cc

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Robert J. Chassell]

    One point that feels mysterious when you are new to these is the
    storing.  Is this the same for all different mail agents in Emacs?

The Emacs Lisp values should all be stored by Emacs the same way.

Emacs is a virtual lisp machine.  Everything that is in an Emacs Lisp
expression is interpreted by the virtual machine.  Programs that are
not part of the virtual machine are often operating system dependent
and their executables are architecture dependent.

Thus, the variable

    rmail-delete-after-output

has a value that is kept by the Emacs virtual machine.

Regarding your second question, 

    Another mysterious point is the settings for different mail
    agents. The setting above seems to suggest that this if for RMAIL
    only?

Any variable can be used anywhere in Emacs.  They are global.  But the
naming convention suggests they are for rmail only.  

It certainly makes sense that rmail-pop-password be advertized to
other email clients by changing the name.  We think of `rmail' as
standing only for `read mail' but it could also stand for `retrieve
mail' ...  That alternative expansion suggests that we use the
`retrieve mail' variables and functions in various programs.

In any event, nowadays, I think your point should be well taken.  The
variable should be called mail-retrieve-remote-password (or something
like that) rather than rmail-remote-password as is currently
suggested.  Moreover, all the movemail code should be moved to a new
Emacs Lisp library called mail-retrieve-remotely.el (or something like
that).

For the past 20 or 30 years, rmail has been the default mail reader
for Emacs.  Since its beginning, Emacs has gained many email readers.
For example MHE was originally written in 1983 for Gosling Emacs and
ported to GNU Emacs shortly after.  (From this perpective, as a mail
reader, gnus is recent.)

My thought is that the current names and lack of a separate library
are a consequence of Emacs' history.  (I am not sure of this; I have
not paid attention to rmail.)  RMAIL variables are like laws and
social customs that may once have returned value greater than losses
resulting from their suppression of cooperation but do not do so now.
However, Emacs variables are global and voluntary so they do less
damage to cooperation as they go obsolete than laws, since laws are
involuntary.

-- 
    Robert J. Chassell                         
    bob@rattlesnake.com                         GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
    http://www.rattlesnake.com                  http://www.teak.cc

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Lennart Borgman]

Robert J. Chassell wrote:

>    It is important ... Maybe you can ... send us the link?  I would
>    be interested and I would try to give you feedback.
>
>Please take a look at
>
>        http://www.teak.cc/softfree/software-freedom.html
>and 
>        http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/Choice-and-Constraint.html
>
>(and some of the other writings on the  http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/
>site).
>
>I am very interested in your comments.
>
How nice! I surely will. Either you are a very fast writer or ....

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> Perhaps I'm a bit trigger happy (this list has that effect on me
> sometimes), but what you're saying dangerously treads the patronizing
> border too, at least IM0.

that's for you to decide; i write w/ neither up nor down intention.

> I don't entirely understand why should I be expected to exercise
> restrain on my ire, and not expect too for Robert to contain that
> preaching impulse of his.

personally, i don't expect you to do this, or anyone else to do
anything.  each of us can construct whatever motivation we wish to
support whatever frame of mind we wish.  if one finds ire (or impulsive
preaching or sideways spewfulness) to be useful, by all means revel in
it.  i read, adding an implicit "IMHO" in front of everything, catch the
part i find useful, and let the rest go.

> Excuse me if I'm wrong. Are you developing Emacs on Windows? I think
> the answer is not, which wouldn't put you on the receiving end of
> Robert's rhetorics.

in some sense, i have placed myself on the receiving end (indirectly, by
participating in this thread), even though i don't use windows.

> The reason I ask is, three people who hack Emacs on Windows (Lennart,
> Eli and myself) have already expressed (in wildly different ways, of
> course) the feeling that Roberts diatribes are not welcome *on
> technical questions*. So it's not just a matter of what I do find
> insulting.

ok.

> Really. I would like to give this issue some rest; I just find hard to
> leave "psychological counseling" like the one above pass unchallenged.
> It reminds me too much of the "you forgot to take your pills" insults
> the kids exchange on Usenet newsgroups.

ok.  i'll bow out of this thread now.

thi

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Richard M. Stallman]

    No. But that does not make us, the people who use and work with
    Windows, unethical. Our priorities are a bit different, that's all.

To use Windows is participating in an unethical activity.  I would not
go so far as to label each person who does so as "unethical"--they
could be just negligent--but the act itself is unethical.

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Richard M. Stallman]

What Bob has said in these messages is valid, and people who don't
know it should learn it.  However, it is true that the people on this
list generally know these points.  So I think the right way to mention
them here is with a brief reminder, rather than an essay explaining
the points as if to people who had not heard them.

These essays can be useful to publish in places where they will be read
by people who are not already aware of the issues.

Re: RMAIL settings [was: Re: w32 does not have emacsclient/server]

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 8/9/05, Richard M. Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> I would not
> go so far as to label each person who does so as "unethical"--they
> could be just negligent

I'll settle for negligent any day, thanks ;-)

-- 
                    /L/e/k/t/u