RE: [Evolution] Bounce/remail command

["Ray Lee" <ray madrabbit org>]

jwz wrote:
> I agree that resending a message when you are the original author is a
> useful and non-dangerous thing.  However this feels more like a one-shot
> template kind of action to me, than a resend action.

Hmm. Yeah, assuming the mailer has the facilities for creating an
archetype, that'd work. It isn't what I'd think of doing intuitively,
though.

> If I wrote a message to A and B, and then C asks for a copy of it, the
> aounds like a job for "forward" rather than "resend".

Actually, this sounds okay. Forwarding, of course, has more going for it
in that it leaves the original message inviolate. However, it is somewhat
annoying to see a message arrive as an attachment, but properly considered
that's really a problem for the reader agent, rather than the sender.

While we're on the subject of the reader, it'd be nice to see
messages-forwarded-as-attachments and rfc1153 digests broken out into
embedded messages within messages. Sort of a

  +--------------------------------------------+
  | Contents for digest, or outermost          |
  | container's message.                       |
  |                                            |
  | +---------------------------------------+  |
  | | Body of digested/attached message 1.  |  |
  | |                      --Alice          |  |
  | +---------------------------------------+  |
  |                                            |
  | +---------------------------------------+  |
  | | Body of digested/attached message 2.  |  |
  | |                      --Bob            |  |
  | +---------------------------------------+  |
  +--------------------------------------------+

style, with each included message a real entity, in that it can be
selected and replied to. This'd fix a few problems I see going 'round with
humans interacting with digests, in that there's always someone who
mistakenly quotes the entire thing in the reply, and rarely does anyone
actually fix the headers for the new message ("Subject: Re: Digest 2690").

Ray Lee / ray madrabbit org ~ rblee impulse net