GNU bug report logs - #33200
message-simplify-subject too coupled with reply

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 33200 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 33200 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Garreau\, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu>
To: submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (The Gnus Bugfixing Girls + Boys)
Subject: message-simplify-subject too coupled with reply
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 04:23:11 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 2018/10/30 at 03:47, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
>>> On 2018/10/28 at 19:16, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
>>>> I would file a couple of bug reports.
>
> […] I’m going to try right now.

So here I go (sorry for quotations, it just feels more right to me as
everything needed as been already said briefly at least once):

On 2018/10/29 at 10:17, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
> "Garreau, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu> writes:
>> On 2018/10/28 at 19:16, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
>>> "Garreau, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu> writes:
>>>> […] in the special case of `message-strip-subject-re',
>>>> [`message-simplify-subject'] removes excedentary “Re:”… and add a
>>>> new one!  so in the end, `message-reply' doesn’t do [it]: that
>>>> fills terribly wrong.  `message-reply' should add a “Re:” (that’s
>>>> the least expectable from it, it’s confusing it is not it that does
>>>> it), and `message-simplify-subject' should do what its name says,
>>>> so that to be really useful: simplify subject, not prepare it for
>>>> another different function (namely, `message-reply')!

On 2018/10/29 at 11:49, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
> On 2018/10/28 at 19:16, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
>> "Garreau, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu> writes:
>>> I wanted to see this function used in `org-email-link-description',
>>> but it’s impossible because of this oddity (otherwise the message
>>> could be falsely seen as a reply while it isn’t one).  If it was
>>> possible, the subject cited in org links could be *semantically*
>>> shorter (rather than blindly arbitrarily cut in the middle), and
>>> benefit from user customizations […].

On 2018/10/29 at 10:17, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
> "Garreau, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu> writes:
>> On 2018/10/28 at 19:16, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
>>> I'm less certain about this. It's one of those cases where probably
>>> no one remembers why it is the way it is, and no one wants to touch
>>> it because who knows how things might suddenly break.
>>
>> I’m pretty sure el-search can be used so that to quickly check how is
>> it: I checked in all gnus, and the symbol `gnus-simplify-subject' is
>> only used in `message-reply' [and `message-followup' (two screens
>> away: confused both in one function (but knew there were two
>> occurrences))].  So unless you do strange stuff with symbol names
>> twiddling or other complex stuff (I believe you are confident enough
>> in not abusing such things in gnus) so to get it without naming it,
>> it is okay. ^^
>
> I'm convinced!

On 2018/10/30 at 03:47, Garreau, Alexandre wrote:
> I wished I knew to make patches (git illiteracy doesn’t help).

I hope this is okay (I use debian’s emacs build, didn’t recompile, just
went in source, modified, and `vc-diff', didn’t “commit” or anything
(`vc-pull', however)):

[message-simplify-subject_re.patch (text/x-patch, inline)]

diff --git a/lisp/gnus/message.el b/lisp/gnus/message.el
index 66356b6fda..0c743bd3aa 100644
--- a/lisp/gnus/message.el
+++ b/lisp/gnus/message.el
@@ -6950,7 +6950,7 @@ Useful functions to put in this list include:
 	     gnus-list-identifiers)
     (setq subject (message-strip-list-identifiers subject)))
   (when (memq 'message-strip-subject-re functions)
-    (setq subject (concat "Re: " (message-strip-subject-re subject))))
+    (setq subject (message-strip-subject-re subject))))
   (when (and (memq 'message-strip-subject-trailing-was functions)
 	     message-subject-trailing-was-query)
     (setq subject (message-strip-subject-trailing-was subject)))
@@ -6989,7 +6989,7 @@ Useful functions to put in this list include:
 	    subject (or (message-fetch-field "subject") "none"))
 
       ;; Strip list identifiers, "Re: ", and "was:"
-      (setq subject (message-simplify-subject subject))
+      (setq subject (concat "Re: " (message-simplify-subject subject)))
 
       (when (and (setq gnus-warning (message-fetch-field "gnus-warning"))
 		 (string-match "<[^>]+>" gnus-warning))
@@ -7060,7 +7060,7 @@ If TO-NEWSGROUPS, use that as the new Newsgroups line."
 		   (string-match "world" distribution)))
 	(setq distribution nil))
       ;; Strip list identifiers, "Re: ", and "was:"
-      (setq subject (message-simplify-subject subject))
+      (setq subject (concat "Re: " (message-simplify-subject subject)))
       (widen))
 
     (message-pop-to-buffer (message-buffer-name "followup" from newsgroups))

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

>>> So should I have bugreported from the beginning? Btw, do Gnus bugs
>>> belong to bug-gnu-emacs mailing-list too? or is there something
>>> separate about Gnus there too? I’m sometimes confused about how much
>>> tight is Gnus to Emacs.
>>
>> This sort of very specific suggestion could have gone in a bug report
>> to begin with, yes, though it doesn't matter too much. Gnus bugs are
>> reported along with Emacs bugs. You can also use `gnus-bug' to do the
>> report,

I guess this is the correct way:

Gnus v5.13
GNU Emacs 25.1.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.22.11)
 of 2017-09-15, modified by Debian

Message #14 received at 33200 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Michael Albinus <michael.albinus <at> gmx.de>
To: "Garreau\, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu>
Cc: 33200 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> gmail.com>,
 help-debbugs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: Processed: control message for bug #33200
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2018 13:16:47 +0100

Michael Albinus <michael.albinus <at> gmx.de> writes:

Hi Alexandre,

>> But ideally I’d like a such function to be linked with the manual, so to
>> remove redundancy, and that’d require an index.
>
> You have now the debbugs-ug.texi node "Mail Command Index" to be
> linked. If we want to make it more accurate, we could even add an
> @anchor to every command.

Finally, I have done this. Every mail command can be referenced to by an
own info link, for example "(debbugs-ug) Mail Command Index: owner" for
the owner command.

Best regards, Michael.

Message #17 received at 33200 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: "Garreau\, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu>
Cc: 33200 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#33200: message-simplify-subject too coupled with reply
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 16:34:24 -0400

"Garreau, Alexandre" <galex-713 <at> galex-713.eu> writes:

> So here I go (sorry for quotations, it just feels more right to me as
> everything needed as been already said briefly at least once):

Thanks for the patch; applied to Emacs 27.1.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.