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

Re: [POLL] Attachment counting



On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:02:41AM -0500, David Champion wrote:
> If you use this feature, please take a moment to reply to this quick
> survey -- preferably off-list, to me directly, so as not to spam
> everyone on the list.  I'll summarize after a few days.
> 
> 1. Do you use the %X feature for $index_format (formerly $hdr_format)?

I would use it, if it worked in the version of Mutt I'm currently
running (some CVS from a few months ago).  It doesn't appear to...

> 2. Do you use the ~X feature for searching or for limiting?

Hard to say if I would use this.  I do use limits, so it's very
possible.

> ( If you answered "no" to any these questions, there's no need to reply. :) )

Any?

> 4. If you use %X in your $index_format, do you primarily use it
>    to say whether a message has attachments ("paperclip style" --
>    e.g., %?X?foo&bar?), or do you really care about the number of
>    attachments present?

I used to have the size of the message in my index, but I decided it
was not worth the extra space it required to display it, so I removed
it.  I would use the attachment count to get a rough idea of how big a
message was...  Obviously not reliable, but a fair tradeoff.

> 5. If you use either of these features, have you customized your Attach
>    and Unattach rules in muttrc?

I wouldn't be likely to.

> 7. Would you consider it a loss for the attachment counter to be reduced
>    strictly to "paperclip style" -- that is, only indicating whether
>    attachments are present, with no configurability of what counts as an
>    attachment and without counting attachments?

Yes, though I would find it satisfactory, assuming it was accurate.

> 8. Would you consider it a loss for the attachment counter to be removed
>    completely?

Absolutely.

-- 
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.  Sorry for the inconvenience.  Thank the spammers.

Attachment: pgphN9LoghqHA.pgp
Description: PGP signature