From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kai Grossjohann Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: RMAIL against Texinfo Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 09:34:11 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87y8rk4l4s.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> References: <2914-Sun01Feb2004191602+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> <87isiq5uzg.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> <878yjmyly5.fsf@emptyhost.emptydomain.de> <7494-Mon02Feb2004210458+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1075797329 1137 80.91.224.253 (3 Feb 2004 08:35:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 08:35:29 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 03 09:35:25 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Anw1l-0002YE-00 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 09:35:25 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Anw1l-0000yI-00 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 09:35:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Anw1T-0002iI-PK for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:35:07 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1Anw1D-0002ZN-7k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:34:51 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.24) id 1Anw0M-0001Gp-Eq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:34:32 -0500 Original-Received: from [80.91.224.249] (helo=main.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Anw0J-0001CK-Lk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 03:33:55 -0500 Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Anw0I-0000ZR-00 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2004 09:33:54 +0100 Original-Received: from 213-203-244-156.kunde.vdserver.de ([213.203.244.156]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue Feb 3 08:33:54 2004 Original-Received: from kai by 213-203-244-156.kunde.vdserver.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue Feb 3 08:33:54 2004 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 49 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 213-203-244-156.kunde.vdserver.de User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:LN61ueRhmgDxD6x8GICRnsZw9rw= X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:19680 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:19680 "Eli Zaretskii" writes: >> From: Kai Grossjohann >> Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 08:33:54 +0100 >> >> It seems that rmail-dont-reply-to-names is already anchored to the >> beginning of an email address by the existing code? > > I think mail-strip-quoted-names removes <> and any other junk, so it > sounds like prepending \` to "info-" would be better than \<. Do you > agree? In that case, sure. (I'm somewhat confused about what does the string look like that's passed to rmail-dont-reply-to-names.) >> >> Also, there is experience with nnmail-fancy-split in Gnus, which >> >> automatically surrounds regexes with \\< and \\>. Users are supposed >> >> to say ".*foo.*" if they want to undo the effect of \\<...\\>. But >> >> after some years it turned out that this didn't always work, and now >> >> there is additional code in the function supporting nnmail-split-fancy >> >> which checks for the regex starting with ".*"... I forgot what >> >> exactly was the problem, though. >> > >> > Well, do you see any reason that this would be relevant to the case >> > in point? mail-utils.el doesn't surround regular expressions with \< >> > and \>, it only does that with usernames, which aren't regexps. >> >> Didn't you suggest to automagically add \\<...\\> to the regexp >> constructed from rmail-dont-reply-to-names? > > Not to rmail-dont-reply-to-names, ti the user's login name and email > address. These two are literal strings, not regular expressions. Oh, you're suggesting to change the default value of rmail-dont-reply-to-names! Okay. That's something else entirely. Sorry that I didn't get this before. Good idea. (The beginning of rmail-dont-reply-to looks strange: in the code (if (null X) (if X foo bar) baz) it seems like foo will never be executed. X is rmail-dont-reply-to-names.) > As to rmail-dont-reply-to-names, I don't think we should surround them > with anything; it's the user's job to do so when she customizes this > option. Right. That's what I was trying to say. Kai