[Mutt] #3037: 'my_hdr' not working with send-hook & reply-hook

#3037: 'my_hdr' not working with send-hook & reply-hook

 hi,

 mutt version Mutt 1.5.10i (2005-08-11) & 1.5.17.

 I have the below setting in ~/.muttrc, which does *not* work.
 unmy_hdr CC
 send-hook st.com 'my_hdr CC: name <at> domain.com'
 reply-hook  st.com 'my_hdr CC: name <at> domain.com'

 --
 dm

--

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3037>

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

In message <20080229053503.GC1539 <at> 4321.tv>,
	Brian Medley (bpm-lists-mutt-dev <at> bmedley.org) wrote:
> 
> I have created a patch that starts a new message to the sender of
> the currently selected message.  In addition, I think I updated
> The Manual correctly.

Great idea.

> Suggestions/Thoughts/Criticism are welcome.

I didn't compile without warnings for me, so I fixed that and also made
a few white space changes to match the usual Mutt style.

Cheers,
       Nick.
--

-- 

--- OPS	2007-05-07~
+++ OPS	2008-02-28
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
 OP_COMPOSE_TOGGLE_RECODE "toggle recoding of this attachment"
 OP_COMPOSE_POSTPONE_MESSAGE "save this message to send later"
 OP_COMPOSE_RENAME_FILE "rename/move an attached file"
+OP_COMPOSE_SENDER "compose new message to sender"
 OP_COMPOSE_SEND_MESSAGE "send the message"
 OP_COMPOSE_TOGGLE_DISPOSITION "toggle disposition between inline/attachment"
 OP_COMPOSE_TOGGLE_UNLINK "toggle whether to delete file after sending it"

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

=- Thomas Roessler wrote on Fri 29.Feb'08 at  9:32:19 +0100 -=

> On 2008-02-29 00:07:29 -0800, William Yardley wrote:
> 
> > Would be great if there were also a 'compose to list' option.
> > Not sure if it would be better to have the function compose to
> > the list if the message is to a subscribed list, or to have a
> > different command for "compose to list".
> 
> Why isn't list-reply close enough for that?

Because you don't want to reply to an existing thread but start a
new one.
I have aliases for that. ;)

--

-- 
© Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal!
EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude.
You're responsible for ALL you do: you get what you give.

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

* Rado S <list2rado <at> gmx.de> [03-02-08 15:27]:
> =- Thomas Roessler wrote on Fri 29.Feb'08 at  9:32:19 +0100 -=
> > On 2008-02-29 00:07:29 -0800, William Yardley wrote:
> > 
> > > Would be great if there were also a 'compose to list' option.
> > > Not sure if it would be better to have the function compose to
> > > the list if the message is to a subscribed list, or to have a
> > > different command for "compose to list".
> > 
> > Why isn't list-reply close enough for that?
> 
> Because you don't want to reply to an existing thread but start a
> new one.
> I have aliases for that. ;)

And you will provide an example ??  :^)

--

-- 
Patrick Shanahan         Plainfield, Indiana, USA        HOG # US1244711
http://wahoo.no-ip.org     Photo Album:  http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
Registered Linux User #207535                    @ http://counter.li.org

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

On 2008-03-02, Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> * Rado S <list2rado <at> gmx.de> [03-02-08 15:27]:
> > =- Thomas Roessler wrote on Fri 29.Feb'08 at  9:32:19 +0100 -=
> > > On 2008-02-29 00:07:29 -0800, William Yardley wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Would be great if there were also a 'compose to list' option.
> > > > Not sure if it would be better to have the function compose to
> > > > the list if the message is to a subscribed list, or to have a
> > > > different command for "compose to list".
> > > 
> > > Why isn't list-reply close enough for that?
> > 
> > Because you don't want to reply to an existing thread but start a
> > new one.
> > I have aliases for that. ;)
> 
> And you will provide an example ??  :^)

Here's an example of what I use, one for each list to which I post.

   folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-dev          \
           'macro index M "<mail>mutt-dev^M^M"     "mail to list"'
   folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-users        \
           'macro index M "<mail>mutt-users^M^M"   "mail to list"'

The second ^M in each of those skips the "Cc:" prompt.

HTH,
Gary

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 02:30:42PM -0800, Gary A. Johnson wrote:
> On 2008-03-02, Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> > * Rado S <list2rado <at> gmx.de> [03-02-08 15:27]:
> > > =- Thomas Roessler wrote on Fri 29.Feb'08 at  9:32:19 +0100 -=
> > > > On 2008-02-29 00:07:29 -0800, William Yardley wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Would be great if there were also a 'compose to list' option.
> > > > > Not sure if it would be better to have the function compose to
> > > > > the list if the message is to a subscribed list, or to have a
> > > > > different command for "compose to list".
> > > > 
> > > > Why isn't list-reply close enough for that?
> > > 
> > > Because you don't want to reply to an existing thread but start a
> > > new one.
> > > I have aliases for that. ;)
> > 
> > And you will provide an example ??  :^)
> 
> Here's an example of what I use, one for each list to which I post.
> 
>    folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-dev          \
>            'macro index M "<mail>mutt-dev^M^M"     "mail to list"'
>    folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-users        \
>            'macro index M "<mail>mutt-users^M^M"   "mail to list"'
> 
> The second ^M in each of those skips the "Cc:" prompt.
> 
> HTH,
> Gary

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

On 2008-03-03, Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke <at> bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 02:30:42PM -0800, Gary A. Johnson wrote:
> > On 2008-03-02, Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> > > * Rado S <list2rado <at> gmx.de> [03-02-08 15:27]:
> > > > =- Thomas Roessler wrote on Fri 29.Feb'08 at  9:32:19 +0100 -=
> > > > > On 2008-02-29 00:07:29 -0800, William Yardley wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Would be great if there were also a 'compose to list' option.
> > > > > > Not sure if it would be better to have the function compose to
> > > > > > the list if the message is to a subscribed list, or to have a
> > > > > > different command for "compose to list".
> > > > > 
> > > > > Why isn't list-reply close enough for that?
> > > > 
> > > > Because you don't want to reply to an existing thread but start a
> > > > new one.
> > > > I have aliases for that. ;)
> > > 
> > > And you will provide an example ??  :^)
> > 
> > Here's an example of what I use, one for each list to which I post.
> > 
> >    folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-dev          \
> >            'macro index M "<mail>mutt-dev^M^M"     "mail to list"'
> >    folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-users        \
> >            'macro index M "<mail>mutt-users^M^M"   "mail to list"'
> > 
> > The second ^M in each of those skips the "Cc:" prompt.
> > 
> > HTH,

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 03:48:30PM -0800, Gary A. Johnson wrote:
> On 2008-03-03, Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke <at> bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 02:30:42PM -0800, Gary A. Johnson wrote:
> > > On 2008-03-02, Patrick Shanahan <ptilopteri <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > * Rado S <list2rado <at> gmx.de> [03-02-08 15:27]:
> > > > > =- Thomas Roessler wrote on Fri 29.Feb'08 at  9:32:19 +0100 -=
> > > > > > On 2008-02-29 00:07:29 -0800, William Yardley wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Would be great if there were also a 'compose to list' option.
> > > > > > > Not sure if it would be better to have the function compose to
> > > > > > > the list if the message is to a subscribed list, or to have a
> > > > > > > different command for "compose to list".
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Why isn't list-reply close enough for that?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Because you don't want to reply to an existing thread but start a
> > > > > new one.
> > > > > I have aliases for that. ;)
> > > > 
> > > > And you will provide an example ??  :^)
> > > 
> > > Here's an example of what I use, one for each list to which I post.
> > > 
> > >    folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-dev          \
> > >            'macro index M "<mail>mutt-dev^M^M"     "mail to list"'
> > >    folder-hook +Incoming/mutt-users        \
> > >            'macro index M "<mail>mutt-users^M^M"   "mail to list"'
> > > 
> > > The second ^M in each of those skips the "Cc:" prompt.
> > > 

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

* Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke <at> bigpond.net.au> [2008-03-03 13:43 +1100]:

>
>I get the headers as part of the message to edit, I have always done
>this and I think it comes from setting edit_header. I am happy to add
>the subject there. I would prefer to not have to hit enter when 
>
>No Subject: Abort? ([Yes]/No
>
>comes up. I have:-
>
>folder-hook . set abort_nosubject=ask-yes
>folder-hook mutt.dev set abort_nosubject=ask-no
>folder-hook mutt.dev          \
>     'macro index M "<mail>mutt-dev^M^M"     "mail to list"<enter>'

Your setting for abort_nosubject is telling it to ask you. It's a 
quadoption -- you need to set abort_nosubject to 'no' and it should
stop nagging you.

Or am I completely misunderstanding you?

--

-- 
Breen Mullins
Menlo Park, California

Re: [PATCH] compose to sender

On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 07:04:33PM -0800, Breen Mullins wrote:
>  * Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke <at> bigpond.net.au> [2008-03-03 13:43 +1100]:
> 
> >
> > I get the headers as part of the message to edit, I have always done
> > this and I think it comes from setting edit_header. I am happy to add
> > the subject there. I would prefer to not have to hit enter when 
> > No Subject: Abort? ([Yes]/No
> >
> > comes up. I have:-
> >
> > folder-hook . set abort_nosubject=ask-yes
> > folder-hook mutt.dev set abort_nosubject=ask-no
> > folder-hook mutt.dev          \
> >     'macro index M "<mail>mutt-dev^M^M"     "mail to list"<enter>'
> 
>  Your setting for abort_nosubject is telling it to ask you. It's a quadoption 
>  -- you need to set abort_nosubject to 'no' and it should
>  stop nagging you.
> 
>  Or am I completely misunderstanding you?

Duh. No you are not. I always had ask-yes, so I just changed it to
ask-no. Of course it should be just no and then it works fine. Must have
been too early this morning. Many thanks.

Brian.

>  -- 
>  Breen Mullins