Re: alternatives for MUA and NUA?
>>>>> "Gerfried" == Gerfried Fuchs <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Gerfried> On 05 Sep 2000, Andreas Fuchs <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Today, Hamish Moffatt <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > Do most mail
>> readers have the same command line interface? Perhaps, > but I
>> really doubt that news readers do.
Gerfried> *scratches* Uhm, right, I haven't thought about that
Gerfried> *damnit* It sounded so good when it came to my mind,
How about defining a standard interface and using wrapper scripts
to convert the parameters?
Surely, it couldn't be too difficult, there are only a limited
number of parameters:
eg: to, cc, subject, body
would be enough, I think, even for programs like bug and reportbug.
Only problem might be MUAs that don't support all of these parameters.
If thats the case, then fix the MUA.
I think it would be worth doing something like the above, just for
netscape, reportbug, and bug.
As for the update-alternatives: I think a better method would be
something like that used for EDITOR - IIRC users can override the
default choice with an environment variable.
>>>>> "Andreas" == Andreas Fuchs <email@example.com> writes:
Andreas> And then, there is gnus.
I have never been able to call gnus satisfactorily from an external
program. I always get annoying side affects - eg.\ the new message
appears in *2 frames*: the current gnus frame *and* a new frame.
There is no need to use two frames, and it only adds to the clutter of
windows I already have on my desktop. If only it would leave the
current frame alone, and it would be OK.
Brian May <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org