[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:31:28 -0600
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1.90 (gnu/linux)
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:04:49 +0000 (UTC) Memnon Anon
MA> Ted Zlatanov <email@example.com> writes:
MA> It is not exactly an uncommon thing to use more than one smtp-server, is
>> I'd say it's a pretty unusual situation. The vast majority have just
>> one in my experience.
MA> I have 3 email accounts, one at my university, one for private mail and
MA> one used for public communication (basically an anti spam provision).
MA> My university account uses my real name, my privat address my nick.
MA> All of them are used regularly, so I really have use for gnus-pers or
MA> postingstyles. And I really want to trust my setup: It would be very
MA> embarassing sending a mail to my Prof. using my nick ;).
MA> If postingstyles are considered usefull, why is using the corresponding
MA> smtp-servers considered unusual?
I was talking about the vast majority of users and should have said so;
I thought the context of your original question was users in general and
not users who have chosen Gnus already.
Gnus users are, of course, a special breed. I expect Gnus users to have
3.4 SMTP servers (the 0.4 is for the one in Malaysia that's only up
during their nighttime :)
>> Still, we should support it better. Have you been happy with the
>> config? Any issues?
MA> Still some minor problems, I try to figure out whats going wrong.
MA> The new approach feels less clean, because it does not use a hook anymore:
MA> "To tackle this problem, instead of hooking CHANGE-SMTP into
MA> MESSAGE-SEND-HOOK, wrap SMTPMAIL-VIA-SMTP totally"
MA> I am no programmer (thank god elisp is fairly easy to read compared
MA> to, say, perl), but so far, patching my own smtpmail.el seems easier
MA> and more reliable than adding things to my .gnus.
To each his own. I would beware of such patches or at least learn about
tools like quilt to manage these patches easily. When (not if)
smtpmail.el is updated, you'll have to worry about the merge.
MA> Alternatively using msmtp could be another easy viable way.
Yeah, please let us know what works for you in the end.