Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!swbatl!texbell!vector!attctc!mjbtn!usource!frankb
From: frankb@usource.UUCP (Frank Bicknell)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Re: Things I'd like to see in ELM
Keywords: time-out
Message-ID: <230@usource.UUCP>
Date: 3 Aug 89 00:20:50 GMT
References: <2918@osiris.UUCP> <1989Jul31.012922.12548@DSI.COM> <8046@spool.cs.wisc.edu>
Reply-To: frankb@usource.UUCP (Frank Bicknell)
Organization: UniSource, Inc. -- Sarasota, FL
Lines: 26

In article <8046@spool.cs.wisc.edu> solomon@gjetost.cs.wisc.edu (Marvin Solomon) writes:
> In article <1989Jul31.012922.12548@DSI.COM> syd@DSI.COM writes:
> >johnj@osiris.UUCP (John Johnston johnj@welch.jhu.edu) writes:
> >
> >:	- some means whereby the mailer could be told to 'time-out'
> >:		if left inactive for too long. It would be nice
> 
> >This is actually backwards from how alot of us use Elm.  We start
> >it up in a window and let it sit there. ...
> 
> I think I know what he means:  I too like to leave Elm running
> all day ...

hmmmm... What's the advantage over just running 'newmail' in the
background?  It tells me when mail arrives right away (well,
within the minute) instead of having to go to some other screen
or window or whatever to check to see what's there.  True, it
scrambles the screen, but _most_ applications have a redraw and
certainly vi does (my most-used application).  

Is there some reason why you guys like to use elm to do
newmail's job?
-- 
Frank Bicknell
UniSource; 1405 Main St, Ste 709; Sarasota, FL 34236
attctc!usource!frankb || frankb@usource.UUCP