On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:38:35 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:24:42 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > Clicking on the button for the part saves the wrong thing, though,
> > > because it's not a real MIME part. That looks a bit awkward to fix, so
> > > perhaps you could s
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 23:52:23 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Below is an idea I came up with, utilizing the content-type
> vs. declared-type distinction. I think it's really simple and neat,
> but I hope not too magical.
>
> Picking up an example mail from the list, inline patches would show up
> lik
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:06:02 +, David Edmondson wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 00:00:05 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > +(defun notmuch-wash-subject-to-patch-filename (subject)
> > + "Convert a patch mail SUBJECT into a filename.
> > +
> > +The resulting filename is similar to the names generate
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 23:52:23 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Below is an idea I came up with, utilizing the content-type
> vs. declared-type distinction. I think it's really simple and neat,
> but I hope not too magical.
>
> Picking up an example mail from the list, inline patches would show up
> lik
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:38:35 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins
wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:24:42 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > Clicking on the button for the part saves the wrong thing, though,
> > > because it's not a real MIME part. That looks a bit awkward to fix, so
> > > perhaps you could
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:24:42 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > Clicking on the button for the part saves the wrong thing, though,
> > because it's not a real MIME part. That looks a bit awkward to fix, so
> > perhaps you could still prefix the name with "inline: " to indicate that
> > it's odd?
>
> I
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 14:24:42 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > Clicking on the button for the part saves the wrong thing, though,
> > because it's not a real MIME part. That looks a bit awkward to fix, so
> > perhaps you could still prefix the name with "inline: " to indicate that
> > it's odd?
>
> I
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 00:00:05 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> +(defun notmuch-wash-subject-to-patch-filename (subject)
> + "Convert a patch mail SUBJECT into a filename.
> +
> +The resulting filename is similar to the names generated by \"git
> +format-patch\". If the patch mail was generated and sent
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:06:02 +, David Edmondson wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 00:00:05 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > +(defun notmuch-wash-subject-to-patch-filename (subject)
> > + "Convert a patch mail SUBJECT into a filename.
> > +
> > +The resulting filename is similar to the names generate
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 00:00:05 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> +(defun notmuch-wash-subject-to-patch-filename (subject)
> + "Convert a patch mail SUBJECT into a filename.
> +
> +The resulting filename is similar to the names generated by \"git
> +format-patch\". If the patch mail was generated and sent
Use the mail subject line for creating a descriptive filename for the wash
generated inline patch fake parts. The names are similar to the ones
created by 'git format-patch'.
If the user has notmuch-wash-convert-inline-patch-to-part hook enabled in
notmuch-show-insert-text/plain-hook, this will ch
Use the mail subject line for creating a descriptive filename for the wash
generated inline patch fake parts. The names are similar to the ones
created by 'git format-patch'.
If the user has notmuch-wash-convert-inline-patch-to-part hook enabled in
notmuch-show-insert-text/plain-hook, this will ch
12 matches
Mail list logo
