<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: ; tag-prefix for more than current thread



On 2006-05-16 18:14, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
> * Martin Trautmann <traut@xxxxxx> [2006-05-16 18:04 +0200]:
>> Currently, I got your own  mutt-patch-1.3.28.nr.threadcomplete which offers 
>> ~a
> 
> That's old and obsoleted by an improved version written by <insert the
> name, I can't remember at the moment, here>.

Ah, thanks...

>> I guess, patch-1.5.6+20040904.tg.mutt-thread.3 applies yet another
>> command, such as ~(~T)? patch-1.5.6+20040904.tg.mutt-thread.2 offered the
>> ~a, too. 
> 
> ~(~T) is an example of what the patch can do. IIRC ~a is only a
> compatibility pattern to be compatible with my patch, I think. But
> IIRC that did not work correctly.

This explains why it was removed in mutt-thread.3.

>> Apart of those patches I'd prefer the more general approach that the
>> tag-prefix could be used in a wider range.
> 
> I think this patch is not less general (nor more general) than what
> you want. E.g. you can directly tag all threads containing an old
> message ~(~r>10d).

I guess I'll have to get used to this nested syntax. 

> If you don't like that, just write a patch to get what you want.

I wish I could :-(
Martin