References: <430FC760-8BF5-4798-89B5-E7F2A16564B7@bubblegen.co.uk>
 <87h9l0qg1p.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <87h9l0qg1p.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <847CC903-FE82-49B4-A3D6-1070D58BF2F3@bubblegen.co.uk>
Cc: "notmuch@notmuchmail.org" <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
From: Matthew Lear <matt@bubblegen.co.uk>
Subject: Re: notmuch-emacs: forward messages inline
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 19:23:22 +0000
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
Precedence: list

Hi Daniel,

> On 5 Nov 2015, at 21:42, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote=
:
>> On Fri 2015-11-06 04:51:53 +0900, Matthew Lear wrote:
>> Are there any recommended ways to selectively forward an email as
>> inline with notmuch-emacs rather than as an RFC822 attachment, eg have
>> a new shortcut key that can be used for this purpose in addition to f?
>> I have toggled one of the mml configuration variables (I forget
>> exactly what it was) which switched the forwarding method to inline
>> (ACAICT this also removed the ability of being able to forward as
>> RFC822), but it also included various header information in the body
>> of the email. Not good.
>=20
> I suppose you could reply to the message (r) and just change the
> addresses, which would include the previous message "inline".  If you
> don't like that it leaks the previous message-id in the In-Reply-To and
> References headers, you can just kill them from the buffer manually.

I guess that's one way, but it's a bit of a faff. Unless it was possible to w=
rap
it all up in lisp, I don't really think it's a good option.

> But can i ask why you'd want this?  forwarded messages as RFC 822
> attachments are significantly more sane for any MUA to deal with.

No arguments on the 'being sane' front, although I have seen
notmuch-emacs fail to correctly formulate an RFC822 attachment of the
original email message a few times. I suspect this was due to MS Outlook
formatting but can't be sure, though. My main use of notmuch is at work
where I have to handle large amounts of email such as bug notifications from=

a couple of systems, messages to/from lists, auto generated stuff for tracki=
ng,
plus the usual reams of corporate email from teams and colleagues. Notmuch
allows me to handle this fantastically. A common use case of forwarding
messages inline is to take an email already received, and send it onto
colleagues. It's not uncommon for this to initiate a new thread of conversat=
ion
and other people could be added to the thread as appropriate. If I were to
forward a message I received as an RFC822 attachment, in order for the
conversation to be coherent and contained in the text when other people were=

added to the thread, the email containing my attachment would need to be
forwarded to (additional) recipients because 'replying to all' and including=
 new
recipients wouldn't contain the original message. As I see it, to be able to=

forward and include people starting a new thread based on the forwarded
message, it needs to be inline. Make sense?
--  Matt=20=