Re: Poll: personal convenience vs. global improvement of docs
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 08:55:17PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 03:40:02PM -0500, chrisisbd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 11:45:39AM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> > > On 2006-05-25, Stephan Seitz <nur-ab-sal@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The feature I'm missing in mutt is the ability to create virtual folder
> > > > (e.g. search in all my folders for mails with this address in the to or
> > > > cc line and create a virtual folder with the results).
> > >
> > > Have you tried grepmail and grepm? grepmail will extract messages
> > > from a mailbox according to various criteria. grepm does the same
> > > and in addition, opens mutt on the resulting temporary mailbox.
> > >
> > Mairix is even closer to what was wanted I think.
>
> These responses miss the point entirely, I think.
>
> Mutt does mail. This feature is often requested. It is a way in
> which mutt COULD suck less... A third-party tool to do the job may
> well work, but it's still a separate tool with an interface not
> consistent with mutt's, which the user has to learn. Mutt SHOULD do
> this, without the aid of other tools.
>
Not necessarily, it depends how well you can integrate the 'other
tool' with mutt. The general Unix/linux philosophy of separate small
tools for doing different jobs applies to mutt as well. Thus one uses
fetchmail for collecting mail, procmail for sorting it, mutt for
reading it, etc. A separate tool for searching mail makes reasonable
sense because one may want to search mail without reading it, e.g. use
mairix to search for something and feed the result into formail.
--
Chris Green (chrisisbd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)