Re: [notmuch] [PATCH 1/2] notmuch-reply: Add support for replying only to sender
authorAneesh Kumar K. V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Fri, 11 Dec 2009 05:31:15 +0000 (11:01 +0530)
committerW. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:35:52 +0000 (09:35 -0800)
0f/a11e95c350f269afab5dba955079f223539dc0 [new file with mode: 0644]

diff --git a/0f/a11e95c350f269afab5dba955079f223539dc0 b/0f/a11e95c350f269afab5dba955079f223539dc0
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..1d3e415
--- /dev/null
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+Return-Path: <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83FD431FAE\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:31:24 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id Zvkp6IGFyURc for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:31:22 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from e23smtp09.au.ibm.com (e23smtp09.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.142])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1AA431FBC\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:31:22 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from d23relay04.au.ibm.com (d23relay04.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.246])\r
+       by e23smtp09.au.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id nBBGVLas022356\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 12 Dec 2009 03:31:21 +1100\r
+Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97])\r
+       by d23relay04.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id\r
+       nBB5RXEF1544224\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:27:33 +1100\r
+Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id\r
+       nBB5VJcp022185\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:31:20 +1100\r
+Received: from skywalker.linux.vnet.ibm.com ([9.124.35.109])\r
+       by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id\r
+       nBB5VGVr022113; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:31:17 +1100\r
+From: "Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\r
+To: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>\r
+In-Reply-To: <87638mfth1.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>\r
+References: <1259830005-3439-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\r
+       <87638mfth1.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>\r
+Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:01:15 +0530\r
+Message-ID: <87ws0ujcv0.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [notmuch] [PATCH 1/2] notmuch-reply: Add support for replying\r
+ only to sender\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 05:31:24 -0000\r
+\r
+On Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:07:54 -0800, Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrote:\r
+> On Thu,  3 Dec 2009 14:16:44 +0530, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:\r
+> > From: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@gmail.com>\r
+> > \r
+> > This patch add --format=sender-only option.\r
+> \r
+> I like the idea here, (and agree that an 'R' keybinding would be great).\r
+> \r
+> But surely there's a way to implement this with dramatically less code\r
+> duplication?\r
+\r
+I sent an updated patch which did the above with less code duplication. Any\r
+chance of getting this merged ?\r
+\r
+-aneesh\r