--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>\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 39FEF431FC0\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 10 May 2014 01:31:24 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0.502\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,\r
+ NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled\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 jirxVQ930Sik for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Sat, 10 May 2014 01:30:59 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6])\r
+ (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+ (No client certificate requested)\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9AAE431FBF\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat, 10 May 2014 01:30:58 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40])\r
+ by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1Wj2gE-0005NK-Ee; Sat, 10 May 2014 09:30:51 +0100\r
+Received: from 5751dfa2.skybroadband.com ([87.81.223.162] helo=localhost)\r
+ by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71)\r
+ (envelope-from <m.walters@qmul.ac.uk>)\r
+ id 1Wj2gE-0004X6-5D; Sat, 10 May 2014 09:30:50 +0100\r
+From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>\r
+To: David Edmondson <dme@dme.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] emacs: Improve the cited message included in replies\r
+In-Reply-To: <1399530272-11857-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org>\r
+References: <1399482846-25308-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org>\r
+ <1399530272-11857-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.2+615~g78e3a93 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1\r
+ (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 09:30:49 +0100\r
+Message-ID: <87ha4y8286.fsf@qmul.ac.uk>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
+X-Sender-Host-Address: 87.81.223.162\r
+X-QM-Geographic: According to ripencc,\r
+ this message was delivered by a machine in Britain (UK) (GB).\r
+X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :)\r
+X-QM-Body-MD5: 7d5b0a9bc4e827920942979c58224985 (of first 20000 bytes)\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Score: -0.1\r
+X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: /\r
+X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to\r
+ determine if it is\r
+ spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam.\r
+ This message scored -0.1 points.\r
+ Summary of the scoring: \r
+ * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail\r
+ provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com)\r
+ * -0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list\r
+X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\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: Sat, 10 May 2014 08:31:24 -0000\r
+\r
+On Thu, 08 May 2014, David Edmondson <dme@dme.org> wrote:\r
+> emacs: Improve the cited message included in replies\r
+>\r
+> v2:\r
+> - Don't run the text/plain hooks when generating the message to quote.\r
+>\r
+\r
+In principle I like this approach: keeping show and reply closely linked\r
+seems good.\r
+\r
+At the moment, as you say, the tests don't all pass. The first reason is\r
+that this puts in buttons for the parts. Stopping that happening is not\r
+completely trivial as we need to make sure that the instruction gets\r
+passed down to sub-parts of multiparts etc. (You could argue that the\r
+'no-button option to notmuch-show-insert-bodypart is buggy as it only\r
+stops the top level button for the part)\r
+\r
+Secondly, the existing code only includes text sub-parts of the\r
+message. I would think your version might include any sub-parts show is\r
+configured to display, including, say images. (However, in my testing\r
+images didn't seem to be included: I am not sure why.)\r
+\r
+I can't tell how much work it is to modify show to take account of these\r
+things, so am not sure if this is the best approach, or just adding\r
+something to deal with rfc822 to our existing reply code is easier.\r
+\r
+Best wishes\r
+\r
+Mark\r
+\r