Subject: fcc to inbox

From: Tony Tung <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 12:15:02 -0700 (PDT)

Hi all,

I currently have my default-fcc set to my inbox.  For the most part, this
works quite well.  However, there is a delay between the sending of
the mail and the updating of the folder.  When the folder is updated, pine
rings the bell, falsely making me believe that there is new mail.  Is
there a way to suppress the bell when I am the sender of the new message?

Thanks.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 For information about this mailing list, and its archives, see: 
 http://www.washington.edu/pine/pine-info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Jacob Morzinski <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:34:08 -0400 (EDT)

> there a way to suppress the bell when I am the sender of the new message?

No, there is not a way to suppress the bell like that.  On the other
hand, you can do away with the delay by going to the last message in
the folder, and then using "N" or down-arrow to try to move beyond
the last message.  When you try to do so, Pine will check for new mail
(and will ring the bell).

-- 
 Jacob Morzinski                                [email-masked]

---

From: Freda B Birnbaum <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:49:10 -0400 (EDT)

> the mail and the updating of the folder.  When the folder is updated,
> pine rings the bell, falsely making me believe that there is new mail.
> Is there a way to suppress the bell when I am the sender of the new
> message?

Actually, I'm just as glad to hear the bell and notice that it's gotten
through.

Freda Birnbaum

---

From: Tony Tung <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:35:57 -0700 (PDT)

> Actually, I'm just as glad to hear the bell and notice that it's gotten

The fact that the fcc made it doesn't imply that it has gotten to the
intended recipient, though.

---

From: Freda B Birnbaum <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 19:36:26 -0400 (EDT)

> intended recipient, though.

For sure.  It is a clue, though.

---

From: Bret Busby <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 14:00:34 +0800 (WST)

On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Freda B Birnbaum wrote:

> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:49:10 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Freda B Birnbaum <[email-masked]>
> To: Pine Discussion Forum <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: fcc to inbox
> 

I find that the only way to know that email has "gotten through", is by
the use of a return receipt request, which I have so far been unable to
use in PINE (I am using 4.21), so, for messages for which I want that
information, I have to use either Netscape Messenger, or Star Office
Mail. A Bcc to me, gives me a copy in my PINE folders.

I wonder at the reason for the redirection of the Fcc, from instead of
going to the sent-mail folder, to the INBOX folder.

-- 
Bret Busby
Armadale
West Australia
..............

"So once you do know what the question actually is, 
 you'll know what the answer means."
 - Deep Thought, 
   Chapter 28 of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
 - Douglas Adams, 1988
.......................................

---

From: Tony Tung <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 10:47:43 -0700 (PDT)

> Mail. A Bcc to me, gives me a copy in my PINE folders.

There's the enable-delivery-status-notification option.  I don't know
which version it was introduced.  It does not request a
message-has-been-read receipt, however.

> going to the sent-mail folder, to the INBOX folder.

It makes it easier to track a conversation.  I don't have to switch back
and forth between inbox and sent-mail.  It also makes the fancy threading
patch by Eduardo Chappa work a lot better.

---

From: Eduardo Chappa <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 11:30:29 -0700

*** Tony Tung ([email-masked]) wrote in the pine-info list today:

:) > I wonder at the reason for the redirection of the Fcc, from instead
:) > of going to the sent-mail folder, to the INBOX folder.
:)
:) It makes it easier to track a conversation.  I don't have to switch
:) back and forth between inbox and sent-mail.  It also makes the fancy
:) threading patch by Eduardo Chappa work a lot better.

The real problem has to do with the handling of the "References:" header
when replying to an e-mail message (or replying to a post in a newsgroup
only through e-mail). I also agree with you that your idea makes threads
look better. It's probable that the best thing to ask for is to ask the
Pine team to add the References header when replying by e-mail. This
header should be used according to RFC 2822, so it would be a good
improvement in Pine. The problems are that:

  - Pine does not generate the References header, if non existing,
    when replying only by e-mail, and

  - Pine drops the References header when replying by e-mail (not if the
    reply goes to a newsgroup, though).

  I modified the fancy thread patch so that Pine adds the References
header when replying by e-mail, precisely for the same reason that Tony
uses his INBOX as fcc folder. I hope this will help aliviate in part the
problem that Tony is trying to solve (this means that exchanging e-mail
between two patched versions of Pine will make threads look good, even if
the fcc is not INBOX, but exchanging e-mail with an unpatched version of
Pine will not, because of the reasons explained above).

-- 
Eduardo
http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/