Hi Clément, On jeu., 15 févr. 2024 at 12:45, Clément Lassieur <clem...@lassieur.org> wrote:
>>> 'b4 shazam' is probably the most trouble-free way to apply patches; >> >> I agree*! > > I don't agree (both Gwene + Gnus or Emacs Debbugs work perfectly too and > allow to apply a range of n patches at once) but I don't think there is > a need for competition here, it's good that we have several tools. Yes for sure it is good to have several tools. And the ones you like. :-) No one is advocating to make ’b4 shazam’ THE only one tool. Instead, I agree with Maxim that exposing Message-ID and relying on ’b4 shazam’ is the most trouble-free and config-less way to apply patches. >> What appears to me “difficult” is that most of the >> tools as Email client are poorly supporting Message-ID. >> >> For instance, debbugs.el (Gnus). To my knowledge, there is not easy way >> to get the Message-ID when reading an article (bug/patch) from Debbugs. >> There is other means for applying patches. But still each time appears >> to me weird. :-) > > It's > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > (with-current-buffer gnus-original-article-buffer > (message-fetch-field "Message-ID")) > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- [...] > May I add too, that you can add "Message-ID" in gnus-visible-headers. And what about Summary buffer? Well, it makes my point, no? :-) For sure the Message-ID is there and for sure it is possible to extract it. However, it appears to me weird that it is not built-in. I mean Message-ID is one of the heart of Emails, and Debbugs is just Emails, but debbugs.el does not provide a built-in access to it. Cheers, simon