[sup-talk] on sup

Magnus Therning magnus at therning.org
Wed Sep 5 03:48:03 EDT 2007

Hash: SHA1

Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Mon Sep 03 00:03:29 +0100 2007:
> Excerpts from Magnus Therning's message of Fri Aug 31 10:12:34 -0700 2007:
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 08:31:04 -0700, William Morgan wrote:
> > >By default ~/.signature should be appended to email (not in the
> > >editor, but in Sup's review screen immediate post editing). If it's
> > >not, it's probably that ~/.sup/config.yaml is pointing to a different
> > >file.
> > 
> > Ah, that's slightly confusing behaviour especially after being used to
> > mutt.  I think I can adapt though :-)
> The signature selection algorithm is tied to Sup's multiple account
> support: the signature file Sup uses is based on the From: address you
> select. You can get the simpler mutt-style behavior by specifying
> :edit_signature: true in config.yaml, which always takes the signature
> of the default account and dumps it into the editor, or you can now
> specify more complicated behavior now with the signature hook.

Ah, cool.  That all makes sense.  I think I like the flow of things as
they are.

> > >Yep, I plan to have first-order GPG support (i.e. not just in the
> > >hooks system.) Not for the next release, but possibly the one
> > >after.  The time is nigh.
> > 
> > Is anyone working on it already?
> There were patches submitted by I think Christian Lee a while ago, but
> they never made it into the svn, mostly because I was waiting for
> multiple account support to stabilize a bit. Which it now pretty much
> has.

I wouldn't mind to be a beta-tester for that.  Let me know if you merge
it, or share the changes in another branch or something.

After thinking a little about this I think it's the receiving of
encrypted/signed emails that's cumbersome to deal with at the moment.
If I'm not completely daft it seems like sending is infinitely flexible
through the hooks system.

> > This makes me think of another little detail, it seems sup's idea of
> > what's read and what's new isn't based on the maildir notion of
> > what's read and what's new (i.e. sup doesn't move mail from /new to
> > /cur when it's read and doesn't recognise that mail in /cur is
> > read).
> Yeah, Sup doesn't sync back any state changes to the original sources.
> The Sup philosophy has been to treat the sources as dumb, which means
> Sup doesn't play well with others. I won't turn aside patches which do
> sync back (partial) message state to the sources, but I'm not planning
> on implementing that stuff myself.

I'll see if I can't get my head around this red-corundum language you're
using and take a stab at adding this.  ;-)

One more question, is there anything "site specific" in the state data
sup maintains?  Would I run into problem if I use rsync/unison to
synchronise sup's state to several machines?
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)


Magnus Therning                             (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4)
magnus@therning.org             Jabber: magnus.therning@gmail.com

What if I don't want to obey the laws? Do they throw me in jail with
the other bad monads?
     -- Daveman

More information about the sup-talk mailing list