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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: [RFC] Reply behavior in KMail
From:       Ingo =?iso-8859-1?q?Kl=F6cker?= <kloecker () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-12-01 21:16:27
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Monday 01 December 2003 12:19, Andreas Gungl wrote:
> Am Monday 01 December 2003 11:53 schrieb Till Adam:
> > On Monday 01 December 2003 11:38, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > > On Sunday 30 November 2003 13:53, Ingo Kl=F6cker wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > Dear fellow core developers: Please take the time to read the
> > > > thread "Ideas on Reply-To-List" on kmail@kde.org and then make
> > > > your decision:
> > > >
> > > > [ ] Revert to the KDE 3.1 behavior where Reply always used the
> > > > value of the Reply-to header
> > > > [ ] Keep the current behavior where Reply works as Reply to
> > > > Sender [ ] Abstention
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > Since it looks like we're still 2 months from KDE 3.2, and this
> > > change of behaviour is very controversial, I'd choose:
> > >
> > > [x] Violate the string freeze and implement the Reply tool button
> > > as a drop-down with the following contents:
> > >
> > > Reply (R or SHIFt-R) <- intelligent: to-list if list (always, not
> > > only on reply-to-mangling), to author else + Reply to Author (R
> > > or SHIFT-R) <- current reply
> > > + Reply to All (A)
> > > + Reply to Mailing-List (L)
> >
> > Ecellent. I'm very glad you propose this, I was thinking the same
> > thing. I've talked to a couple of people (users) about what they
> > would expect, and what you describe is exaclty it. r should
> > apparently reply to the list, if there is one (reply-to set or not)
> > and to the author if there is no list. Everything else seems
> > confusing.
> >
> > That said, I do find the current scheme clearer and was very
> > tempted to opt to keep it, but I've been convinced (in no small
> > part by my wife) that I like it because it is cleaner
> > _implementation_ wise, not usage wise.
> >
> > > This is adding a single string "Reply To Author". I guess
> > > translators will be able to cope with that...
> > >
> > > I don't have an opinion on which of the two actions "reply" and
> > > "reply to author" gets the R shortcut and which one gets SHIFT-R,
> > > though.
> >
> > reply should be r. That removes the problem with upgrading users
> > encountering changed behavior, mostly.
> >
> > Till
>
> Well, I'm no core developer. But I think what Marc and Till outline
> is the best of what can get achived for 3.2 (especially the comment
> regarding users upgrading from 3.1).

Okay, I'll prepare a patch.

Regards,
Ingo

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail

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