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

Re: [ANNOUNCE] mutt 1.5.16 released



On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 07:52:49PM +0200, Vladimír Marek wrote:
> > > #!/bin/sh
> > > vim "$@"; true
> > 
> > This is no better than ignoring errors entirely, without even
> > bothering to check to see if the file changed.
> 
> You mentioned that the file has changed. Someone else might wish to
> ignore first three lines which contain message date and which is set
> automatically in his editor. IMO the script is easier and more flexible
> solution.

Only if you're a programmer.  Lots of people who use Mutt are not.

> > The model Mutt has chosen to use is that it calls external programs to
> > deal with editing mail.  Having chosen this model, Mutt has some
> > responsibility to the user to make sure what results from running the
> > editor is in some way sane.
> 
> Define "in some way sane ...". If we say "hey user, every return code
> from your editor other than 0 is error" he can tune his configuration.

I've already addressed this in detail in this thread.

> > > The script approach, on the other hand, is a lot simpler for mutt.
> > 
> > Simpler, yes... but also horribly wrong, worse than all of the other
> > currently proposed alternatives.  When there *is* an error, mutt will
> > happily send an unchanged message, and not alert the user to the fact
> > this has happened.
> 
> Hmm, if I exit my editor, I'm back to mail composing page, I have to hit
> "y" to send the mail actually. I believe this is default behavior. 

Sure, but are you suggesting that the user should edit the message
*again* to make sure his message was updated?

Using this script method, the user has (or may have) no reason to
think his edit session failed.  Mutt always gets an exit status of 0,
and does not check to see if the file was changed.  The user will
naturally assume that everything went fine, and send the message.

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

Attachment: pgpo9K7LBzwtc.pgp
Description: PGP signature