Added a comment: different approach
authorhttps://openid.stackexchange.com/user/07a2d9fc-965f-4e97-87d8-51737b7102cc <cayetano_santos@web>
Thu, 9 Jan 2014 15:11:08 +0000 (16:11 +0100)
committerStefano Zacchiroli <zack@upsilon.cc>
Thu, 9 Jan 2014 15:11:08 +0000 (16:11 +0100)
blog/posts/2010/02/integrating_Mutt_with_Org-mode/comment_6_9db75cac6fbb79631fd653ca99d9609d._comment [new file with mode: 0644]

diff --git a/blog/posts/2010/02/integrating_Mutt_with_Org-mode/comment_6_9db75cac6fbb79631fd653ca99d9609d._comment b/blog/posts/2010/02/integrating_Mutt_with_Org-mode/comment_6_9db75cac6fbb79631fd653ca99d9609d._comment
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..6669a60
--- /dev/null
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+[[!comment format=mdwn
+ username="https://openid.stackexchange.com/user/07a2d9fc-965f-4e97-87d8-51737b7102cc"
+ nickname="cayetano santos"
+ avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/af01d6e35916a53e2dcae5da9ce72f1565b7b0850ab5939e498219a5991f608c"
+ subject="different approach"
+ date="2014-01-09T15:11:03Z"
+ content="""
+Hi, I am using a slightly different approach when going from mutt to orgmode. I proceed through a bash script and then I call emacsclient. Mail processing and template capture is executed in elisp from within emacs, no need of org-protocol. Details here https://github.com/csantosb/config/tree/master/mutt under 'Annotate macro', what do you think ?
+c.
+"""]]