> * Roland Winkler <jvax...@tah.bet> [2012-03-15 05:24:27 -0500]: > > On Wed Mar 14 2012 Sam Steingold wrote: >> I am pretty sure that every user who sets >> bbdb-message-all-addresses to non-nil would want this patch: > > I guess we were not talking about BBDB if every user had not strongly > diverging opinions about such things. In that sense, I am rather > hesitant to implement a hard-coded binding of a user variable inside > such a command.
I understand and share this immediate reaction; however, this hard-coded binding is a simple bug fix - just try customizing bbdb-message-all-addresses to t and reading your mail with it for a while; and use ";" - you will immediately see that the current behavior is just a bug. -- Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on Ubuntu 11.10 (oneiric) X 11.0.11004000 http://www.childpsy.net/ http://palestinefacts.org http://jihadwatch.org http://dhimmi.com http://iris.org.il http://pmw.org.il http://camera.org Those who beat their swords into plowshares plow for those who do not. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure _______________________________________________ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
