Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> We have %s and %b so that we can reconstruct the whole thing by >> using both. It is unclear how %bT fits in this picture. I wonder >> if we also need another placeholder that expands to the body of the >> message without the trailer---otherwise the whole set would become >> incoherent, no? > > I'm not entirely sure what to do here. I just wanted a way to easily > format "just the trailers" of a message. We could add something that > formats just the non-trailers, that's not too difficult. Not really > sure what I'd call it though. I was wondering if %(log:<name of a part>) was a better way to go. %(log:title) and %(log:body) would be equivalents of traditional %s and %b, and %(log:body) in turn would be a shorter way to write %(log:description)%+(log:trailer), i.e. show the message body, and if there is a trailer block, add it after adding a blank line. Or something like that?