bug#36266: 26.1; Problems with sieve-manage

[Eric Abrahamsen]

Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:

> On 07/25/19 11:28 AM, Eric Abrahamsen wrote:
>> hartzell@alerce.com writes:
>>
>>> I asked for help with these on the `help-gnu-emacs` mailing list and
>>> Eric suggested that I also report them as bugs so that they don't get
>>> lost.  Here is the email thread:
>>>
>>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-gnu-emacs/2019-06/msg00185.html
>>>
>>> g.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> I've been trying to use sieve-manage in GNU Emacs 26.1 on a Mac with
>>> dovecot-pigeonhole-0.5.6 on a FreeBSD 12 system.
>>>
>>> I've run into a few problems:
>>>
>>> 1. I can start sieve-manage, use the `f` key with the `<new script>`
>>>    line highlighted, edit a script, and use `C-c C-l` to upload it to
>>>    the server.
>>>
>>>    The problem is that the script, on the server, is named `<new
>>>    script>.sieve`, which is awkward.
>>>
>>>    But worse, if/when I restart sieve-manage it offers me two choices,
>>>    one labeled `<new script>` (which is the button to create a new
>>>    script) and one which is the existing script which was saved under
>>>    that same name.
>>>
>>>    I've tried renaming the buffer, but the code has a preference for
>>>    `sieve-buffer-script-name`.
>>>
>>>    Is there some way to rename the buffer?
>>
>> I think it's a little weird that `sieve-new-script' (which defaults to
>> "<new script>" is a configurable option at all. IMO, there are two
>> separate concerns: some placeholder text for the button that's used to
>> create a new script (there's no reason to make this configurable), and
>> the default name for a newly-created script (the new name should be
>> prompted for on a script-by-script basis, and there's no reason to have
>> a default at all).
>>
>> I've attached a simple diff which checks if your new script has the same
>> name as `sieve-new-script' and prompts you to rename it. But I think a
>> more sensible solution would be to remove the `sieve-new-script' option
>> altogether. Then hard-code the "new script" button text, and always
>> prompt for a name for a new script.
>
> I'll just do the simpler fix for now...