Pierre Baillet
2007-Oct-15 06:02 UTC
[sup-talk] sup-sync-back: killed threads and read status
Hi, sup-sync-back does not seem to delete killed messages. I think, it should do that. Moreover, the "Read" status of emails is not changed in the original mailbox. I''m not sure it''s sup-sync-back job to do that, but the Principle Of Least Surprise would probably expect that. Cheers, -- Pierre Baillet <pierre at baillet.name> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/sup-talk/attachments/20071015/b0db3b0b/attachment.html
Christopher Warrington
2007-Oct-15 06:42 UTC
[sup-talk] sup-sync-back: killed threads and read status
Excerpts from Pierre Baillet''s message of Mon Oct 15 01:02:12 -0500 2007:> sup-sync-back does not seem to delete killed messages. I think, it should do > that.That make sense to be. "Kill thread" (&) is more like "Ignore thread" than "Delete thread" (d) (at least to me). I still want it in my index in case I want to get something from it later. I am, however, no longer interested in it or changes to it. -- Christopher Warrington <chrisw at rice.edu>
William Morgan
2007-Oct-29 15:46 UTC
[sup-talk] sup-sync-back: killed threads and read status
Excerpts from Pierre Baillet''s message of Sun Oct 14 23:02:12 -0700 2007:> sup-sync-back does not seem to delete killed messages. I think, it > should do that.It shouldn''t delete them. A killed thread is a thread you don''t want to ever show up in the inbox, but that''s not the same as wanting to delete something. You may want to keep that thread around for later browsing or searching. GMail used to call them murdered threads, but changed the name to muted threads in the release. Maybe I should call them "kept quiet" threads. :)> Moreover, the "Read" status of emails is not changed in the original > mailbox. I''m not sure it''s sup-sync-back job to do that, but the > Principle Of Least Surprise would probably expect that.I''ve purposely avoided writing changes back to the original sources, since it''s a world of pain, will never be 100% complete (Sup state is much more complex than Maildir/IMAP/mbox state), and doesn''t fit in the Sup weltanshaung of treating sources as dumb buckets. I will accept patches to sup-sync-back to set read/unread status, but only grudgingly! -- William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>