Hello.
Since this patches got in, I have yet to send a single email to the
address(es) I intend to :( I am really used to the bindings and this
change is a pain. From IRC discussion, it seems like I am not alone
here.
There was a proposal to change reply bindings to 'ra' and 'rs'. When
'r' is p
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:06:15 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Since this patches got in, I have yet to send a single email to the
> address(es) I intend to :( I am really used to the bindings and this
> change is a pain. From IRC discussion, it seems like I am not alone
> here.
>
> T
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:06:15 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
>
> If others like it, how about reverting to the old bindings until the new
> ones are implemented?
>
Flip-flopping the bindings will just cause more confusion, in my opinion.
It is easy (and documented in the wiki) to customize the
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:06:15 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
wrote:
> Since this patches got in, I have yet to send a single email to the
> address(es) I intend to :( I am really used to the bindings and this
> change is a pain. From IRC discussion, it seems like I am not alone
> here.
Yeah, this has b
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:06:15 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin wrote:
> Since this patches got in, I have yet to send a single email to the
> address(es) I intend to :( I am really used to the bindings and this
> change is a pain. From IRC discussion, it seems like I am not alone
> here.
Yeah, this has bi
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:06:15 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
wrote:
>
> If others like it, how about reverting to the old bindings until the new
> ones are implemented?
>
Flip-flopping the bindings will just cause more confusion, in my opinion.
It is easy (and documented in the wiki) to customize the
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 22:06:15 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin
wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Since this patches got in, I have yet to send a single email to the
> address(es) I intend to :( I am really used to the bindings and this
> change is a pain. From IRC discussion, it seems like I am not alone
> here.
>
>
Hello.
Since this patches got in, I have yet to send a single email to the
address(es) I intend to :( I am really used to the bindings and this
change is a pain. From IRC discussion, it seems like I am not alone
here.
There was a proposal to change reply bindings to 'ra' and 'rs'. When
'r' is p
For those not on IRC:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:31:16 -0400, David Bremner wrote:
> This series definitely needs a NEWS item.
id:"1326559168-29178-1-git-send-email-jani at nikula.org"
> Perhaps some kind soul could add a wiki entry explaining to people how
> to swap the bindings, just in case th
Slightly refactor "notmuch reply" recipient and user from address scanning
functions in preparation for reply-to-sender feature.
Add support for not adding recipients at all (just scan for user from
address), and returning the number of recipients added.
No externally visible functional changes.
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 16:46:15 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Slightly refactor "notmuch reply" recipient and user from address scanning
> functions in preparation for reply-to-sender feature.
>
Pushed, bindings change and all.
This series definitely needs a NEWS item.
Perhaps some kind soul could
For those not on IRC:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:31:16 -0400, David Bremner wrote:
> This series definitely needs a NEWS item.
id:"1326559168-29178-1-git-send-email-j...@nikula.org"
> Perhaps some kind soul could add a wiki entry explaining to people how
> to swap the bindings, just in case there
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 16:46:15 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> Slightly refactor "notmuch reply" recipient and user from address scanning
> functions in preparation for reply-to-sender feature.
>
Pushed, bindings change and all.
This series definitely needs a NEWS item.
Perhaps some kind soul could
Slightly refactor "notmuch reply" recipient and user from address scanning
functions in preparation for reply-to-sender feature.
Add support for not adding recipients at all (just scan for user from
address), and returning the number of recipients added.
No externally visible functional changes.
14 matches
Mail list logo
