Re: [RFC-PATCH 1/2] send-email: new option to quote an email and reply to

Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:

Actually, I'm not sure what the ideal behavior should be. Perhaps it's
better to distinguish 1) and 2) above, and have two options
--reply-to-email=<file> doing 1), and --quote doing 2), implying
--compose and requiring --reply-to-email.

I tend to agree that sounds like a better way to structure these
features.

I wonder if we can safely repurpose existing --in-reply-to option?
That is, if the value of --in-reply-to can be reliably determined as
a filename that has the message (as opposed to a message-id), we
read the "Message-Id:" from that file to figuire out what message-id
to use, and figure out To/Cc: to use for the purpose of your (1) at
the same time.  In the future, you might even teach send-email,
perhaps via a user configurable hook, a way to get to the message
header and text given a message-id, and when it happens, the same
logic can be used when --in-reply-to is given a message-id (i.e. you
go from the id to the message and find the addresses you would
To/Cc: your message).

In any case, quoting the message without replying to it does not make
sense (especially if you add instructions to trim it: the user would not
even see it). So it its current form, I'd say --quote-email should imply
--annotate.