top | item 4922542

A vim interface for gmail: Vmail

145 points| ezl | 13 years ago |danielchoi.com | reply

75 comments

order
[+] 3amOpsGuy|13 years ago|reply
When will we get a "programer's web browser"?

I mean a full blown browser of current generation abilities, but with the option of completely keyboard driven interaction. Concise input of small commands (navigation, data extraction, exploring and massaging of extracted data, data uploading etc.) that can be composed to form more complex interactions.

It should have full interoperability with the CLI, don't go re-inventing grep, sed etc. but instead stand on their shoulders by interoperating fluently with them. In practice i expect this means the "programer's browser" functions as a full blown terminal emulator too.

If it were a text editor (and it should be a competent one of those, but the web is more than a textual medium so some implementations should certainly offer richer functionality than plain text editing) then the net and its many protocols would be its filesystem.

It should be extensible, but only by 1 language. Competing programer's browsers could offer alternative extension languages as their differentiator.

It should be entirely open for extension, by that i mean more than plugins, i should be able to rip out core parts of it to be replaced with alternative implementations (A's needs won't match B's needs and so on).

It shouldn't go too far though, it shouldn't be a full blown operating system: why re-invent the wheel, reuse the thousands of man years effort in existing OS's. It should be multi platform.

We almost have the requisite component parts available now, who's going to get the ball rolling with the new wave of "programer's browsers"?

[+] freshhawk|13 years ago|reply
For now, as has been pointed out, the answer is uzbl.

(Almost exactly what you describe is my current dream project, pieces designed, pieces roughed out, no part even remotely finished. The one I will get back to working on as soon as my startup exits and I have money and time. Or when it fails and I have time. You are not alone in wanting this.)

[+] mikeplus48|13 years ago|reply
There's luakit, uzbl, surf and jumanji from the top of my head, but I don't think any of these have "full interoperability with the CLI". luakit is definitely my favourite as it has been much more reliable than uzbl and easier to configure/extend (in lua).
[+] a3_nm|13 years ago|reply
I feel like the Web is evolving too fast right now for this kind of things to happen. It's already ridiculously hard to keep up with all the innovation, so there is no time to stop and reflect and build a browser from scratch with a clean and modular design. Maybe it will happen once something different than the Web takes off.

To add to your specifications: a "programer's web browser" should communicate with the user in a way which assumes that the user is knowledgeable. It should not use ridiculous metaphors like "this site could harm the computer! back to safety" or noob-oriented advice like "check the address for typing errors", but tell me things like "this URL is registered as a phishing site in such and such blacklist", "access to this site would violate an STS policy", "no DNS record for this domain, here is the result of the lookup", "no reply from IP A.B.C.D, here is a traceroute", etc.

My current choice of a keyboard-oriented browser is Firefox with the pentadactyl extension. It's not perfect, but better than anything else I've tried (including uzbl, which doesn't seem mature or well-documented enough).

[+] whatshisface|13 years ago|reply
>It should be extensible, but only by 1 language. Competing programer's browsers could offer alternative extension languages as their differentiator.

Why not have a packet-based interface for browser extentions AND automation? (like a database)

[+] srathi|13 years ago|reply
One possible way is to use an extension called 'Vimium' with Google Chrome.
[+] baydinalex|13 years ago|reply
I love it. For decades, my flame war offensives against the evil crusaders of Emacs have stalled out against their Maginot Line of "But Emacs can be your mail client too!" This is like a Blitzkrieg of flame war glory. PARIS PREPARE TO BE MINE!!!
[+] yakiv|13 years ago|reply
Victory shall not be yours until your precious Vim has both Tetris and Towers of Hanoi. Emacs shall prevail.
[+] algorias|13 years ago|reply
> To save you keystrokes, Vmail provides alternative key mappings for ,* , ,#, and ,!

Unfortunately, vmail doesn't seem to consider internationalization important at all. US users save a single press of the shift key when starring messages (,8 instead of ,*), but on a german keyboard, where the star is shift-3 instead of shift-8, the shift-less version of starring trashes the message instead. Not a typo I'm eager to make.

Problems like this are, sadly, way too common.

[+] ninjin|13 years ago|reply
One, just as another user pointed out, remapping is easy.

Two, I personally think that most international keyboards I have used have been any good at all for the tasks we face as programmers/hackers/developers. They put an emphasis on producing text, not code, and if you spend most of your day typing code and English anyway I can't see why we should "waste" precious keyboard real-estate.

I ditched my Swedish layout during my first year at university, went US-style and remapped the three keys that I needed to type "native" characters to Start-key combos. I haven't looked back since. It was also the point where I started touch-typing.

[+] icebraining|13 years ago|reply
So, it doesn't implement VIM's remapping commands?
[+] kecebongsoft|13 years ago|reply
While this is awesome, I am one of those guys who feel uncomfortable to store my raw password in a dotfile, not to mention I'm managing my dotfiles in Github, authentication in every run doesn't seem convenient either. I see that this happens in other places such as Github gists-terminal and some twitter-terminal clients. Is there any way we can store these credentials locally in a safer way like SSH keys?.
[+] morpher|13 years ago|reply
For a nice gpg-encrypted password store, see "pass": http://zx2c4.com/projects/password-store/

Many programs that require passwords (e.g., mutt, offlineimap, msmtp) let you specify a command to retrieve the password, which is really easy using pass.

[+] pge|13 years ago|reply
for vim fans, another option is mutt or alpine with vim as your editor. Both work with gmail.
[+] antidoh|13 years ago|reply
Yeah. This is cool and all, but it's kind of like modifying your cigarette lighter to carry passengers.
[+] dllthomas|13 years ago|reply
Also nmh, though it can be complicated to set up (especially to set up well). Still meaning to put together a tutorial / description of my setup...
[+] madewulf|13 years ago|reply
Exactly, there is pine/mutt/alpine for that.
[+] thezilch|13 years ago|reply
Does it have support for two-factor auth? In the event of 2FA/MFA, I'm assuming one needs to generate an application-specific password and keep that in the .rc?

Alternatively, I see there are requests for using OAuth, which would be a similar approach to have a "token" that can be revoked.

[+] chimeracoder|13 years ago|reply
> In the event of 2FA/MFA, I'm assuming one needs to generate an application-specific password and keep that in the .rc?

As far as I am aware, this is currently a limitation of any third-party client that connects to Gmail.

[+] freshhawk|13 years ago|reply
I hope you at least felt some pain in your soul when you wrote a vim plugin for email that was gmail only.

Why on earth would you do that?

[+] herval|13 years ago|reply
Apparently some people in the world use gmail. He wrote something that will be at least interesting to try, so why should he feel any "pain in his soul"?

go there and make something too, instead of hoping for other people's souls...

[+] alpb|13 years ago|reply
Welcome to Hacker News.
[+] xiaomai|13 years ago|reply
This is quite similar to notmuch's vim plugin, if that makes you feel any better.
[+] tommorris|13 years ago|reply
This is pretty awesome. I've used Mutt in the past but always found it a little bit over-the-top. This is very, very simple to setup and does the job pretty well.

But better than that... oh my word, the documentation. How I wish every command line app had that kind of documentation. Just one page that documents the shit out of it.

There's only one thing that would make it better: if that documentation came bundled with the RubyGem so I could read it offline with `ri`.

[+] purephase|13 years ago|reply
This is insane. Amazing, but insane.
[+] wheeee|13 years ago|reply
Does this mean that vim is now officially finished?
[+] tambourine_man|13 years ago|reply
Zawinski's Law

Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. Those programs which cannot so expand are replaced by ones which can.

[+] dysoco|13 years ago|reply
Wow, I love the idea. I have always wanted to manage my mail via terminal, but didn't want to set up Mutt or something similar.
[+] ef4|13 years ago|reply
Setting up mutt for GMail these days is no harder than setting up vmail. This is a complete config file for mutt that will connect to your gmail account:

    set folder=imaps://imap.gmail.com:993
    set spoolfile=+INBOX
    set imap_user='[email protected]'
    set smtp_url = "smtp://[email protected]:587/"
If you don't want to enter your password every time, you can set it as imap_pass (for reading) and smtp_pass (for sending).
[+] eggoa|13 years ago|reply
To me, here at work on a Windows machine, that looks like way too many dependencies for me. Looks cool, though.
[+] bprater|13 years ago|reply
With as much ram as people have on their machines these days, try virtualizing!
[+] alexpopescu|13 years ago|reply
iawesome!thanks danielESC:wq
[+] tsm|13 years ago|reply
0~fti ^]2w~A!^]:x<RET>
[+] tbirdz|13 years ago|reply
It would be great if this had integrated gpg signing and encryption, especially as firegpg doesn't work w/ gmail any more.
[+] mathteacher1729|13 years ago|reply
Perhaps it is a silly question, but what advantages does this offer over Gmail's rather robust set of keyboard shortcuts?
[+] Tichy|13 years ago|reply
Why gmail and not email?
[+] skrebbel|13 years ago|reply
cool! plain curiosity: why gmail-only instead of imap?