Re: Feature request: missing attachment (was: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros)

To: Dickon Hood <dickon-ml@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Feature request: missing attachment (was: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros)
From: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:23:57 +0100
Cc: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060115215731.GF16938@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mutt-dev-request@mutt.org?Subject="Unsubscribe Mutt Dev"?body=unsubscribe>
References: <20060115193922.GA17110@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060115201545.GA58031@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060115201808.GA66765@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <m3vewli3go.fsf_-_@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060115215731.GF16938@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006, Dickon Hood wrote:

> Actually, I was thinking about this earlier.  Personally, I'd find an
> 'Attach:' pseudo-header (as I use header editing) exceptionally useful.

Seems there's a similar functionality to what I suggested as vim script:
<http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1015> which goes
halfway there.

-- 
Matthias Andree

References:
- tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros
  - From: Phil Pennock
- Re: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros
  - From: Nicolas Rachinsky
- Re: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros
  - From: Nicolas Rachinsky
- Feature request: missing attachment (was: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros)
  - From: Matthias Andree
- Re: Feature request: missing attachment (was: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros)
  - From: Dickon Hood

Prev by Date: Re: Copyright years
Next by Date: Re: mutt/2162: don't invoke bind_textdomain_codeset() whith --disable-nls
Previous by thread: Re: Feature request: missing attachment (was: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros)
Next by thread: Re: Feature request: missing attachment (was: tag-push and tag-pop for tag-prefixing macros)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread