[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: [patch] POP3 Filter
From:       Michael =?iso-8859-1?q?H=E4ckel?= <haeckel () kde ! org>
Date:       2001-12-02 8:53:05
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 30 November 2001 20:25, Heiko Hund wrote:
>
> > At least I didn't immidiately find out, what is meant with the yellow
> > one.
>
> I also think the yellow one needs more work, but we had no other
> inspiration. Maybe someone has a better idea out there?
>
> > Regarding the filter rules: I think, it is not nice, that there is no
> > possibility to manually change deleting/downloading for mails where a
> > filter matched any more. At least for deleting there should be always a
> > confirmation. This "Show messages matched by a ruleset and tagged
> > 'Download' or 'Delete'" doesn't seem to have an effect.
> > Maybe the mails where a rule matched, should be displayed in a different
>
> list
>
> > than the others and the just the radiobuttons should be preselected.
>
> Ooops, my fault. Actually the checkbox was supposed to show another
> ListView with the filtered messages in it. There is a little bug in the
> code, which i will fix tonight. To see how it should look, activate the
> checkbox 'Show Later Msgs' in the POP Filter cfg dialog. This will
> deactivate the bug!
>
> > It doesn't work nicely together with interval mail checking. I think,
>
> interval
>
> > mail cheking should never lead to any dialogs popping up, this is simply
> > annoying, if I type a mail and suddenly a modal dialog appears. Maybe the
> > mails should be simply kept on the server for eventual later download in
>
> this
>
> > case and the statusbar could display some information about then.
>
> Well, IMHO interval checking and pop filtering are two different
> approaches. The one is for the 'always on' type of guy, where the other is
> for the 'quick in quick out' user. If someone really wants to play both
> fields, he/she can always define a ruleset to tag all mails 'download
> later'.
> There ain't such things as a free lunch... =)

Interval mail checking is indeed nothing for people with an expensive dialup 
connection.

> > At least with certain mailboxes I get an assertion failure, see below.
>
> Seems,
>
> > that an zero size header is retrieved for some reason.
>
> We'll look into that, but it has never happen to us, so we're not quite
> sure what to do.

I guess, it is most likely a bug in the POP3 KIO slave. The TOP command was 
never really used before.

> > A little issue: Sorting by size doesn't work correctely, if the sizes
> > differ in the number of digits.
>
> I'll fix that.
>
> > However I see also a really big problem with this patch, sorry: There is
> > way too much code duplication done.
>
> We absolutely agree with you. We thought about merging the code later, but
> since we badly wanna make it into the beta, we'll try to submit a second -
> cleaner - patch tomorrow. Do you see a chance we can make it? And if not,
> what reason should be erased as well?

Ok, if you promise to merge that later and also to care for later found 
problems in your code, I'll put it in for the beta and for KDE 3.0.

Regards,
Michael Häckel
_______________________________________________
kmail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]