Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Take 3: Mimetree and mime part support. Resolve #862. #1480

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
May 6, 2020

Conversation

ryneeverett
Copy link
Contributor

This supersedes #1475 in response to the review there.

lucc and others added 13 commits March 23, 2020 09:36
The command is implemented analogous to togglesource and similar commands.
But this commit only contains the toggleing logic and no generation of actual
mime trees.
Only minimal information and no indenting is shown until now.
It is suggested in pazz#862:

> something like select to display a rendered version of the current mime part
> (either inside the tree or in a new buffer)

I played around with these options before arriving at the current
behavior. Adding the mime part content to the mimetree seemed made for a
very busy/over-nested screen and didn't seem all that useful. Likewise
opening in another buffer doesn't seem useful and might need a new
Buffer subclass in order to be well labeled.

The `select` behavior I ended up going with was to change the mime part
chosen by default in the Message itself. This should make implementing
other commands (e.g. pipeto) on the mime parts trivial.

I took `select` a step further by also having it conveniently togglemimetree
off. I can't think of any use case for remaining in the mimetree view after
making a selection.
This allows attachments to be opened from the mime tree the same way
they would be opened in the message tree.
Copy link
Owner

@pazz pazz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks good to me at first glance.
Thanks for adding bindings and statusline support.

@pazz
Copy link
Owner

pazz commented Apr 9, 2020

@lucc what do you think?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants