[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd
From: |
Richard M Stallman |
Subject: |
bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:27:53 -0400 |
C-u M-x rmail RET foo RET
d
x
y
s ; rather than C-x C-s
both prompt twice: separately about converting to mbox, then about
expunging messages. This seems entirely sensible to me.
Remember that s also does expunge. If you give two commands that can
query, you may get two quieries.
This says nothing about whether one command should query the user twice.
I find your argument unpersuasive.
If people generally want x to query twice, I won't argue against it,
but your pushing hard doesn't constitute people generally.
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, (continued)
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Richard M Stallman, 2009/04/14
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Glenn Morris, 2009/04/15
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Richard M Stallman, 2009/04/16
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Glenn Morris, 2009/04/16
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/04/16
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Glenn Morris, 2009/04/16
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/04/16
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd,
Richard M Stallman <=
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Glenn Morris, 2009/04/17
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Richard M Stallman, 2009/04/18
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Glenn Morris, 2009/04/20
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Stefan Monnier, 2009/04/20
- bug#2941: rmail's new handling of Babyl files is odd, Stefan Monnier, 2009/04/18