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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] Don't merge lines when smart quoting mails without user
From:       Martijn Klingens <klingens () kde ! org>
Date:       2004-06-12 22:16:04
Message-ID: 200406130016.08010.klingens () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

No response at all? :)

At least I'd like to see a discussion around this patch. I'm still convinced 
it's better to have it than to not have it, although one could think of other 
ways to trigger the enhanced quoting algorithm than the user agent that I 
used.

Martijn

On Monday 31 May 2004 23:41, Martijn Klingens wrote:
> (Quite a long subject :)
>
> Attached patch suppresses the merging of lines when smart quoting mails
> that don't have a user agent set. The reason is that those often contain
> stuff that becomes unreadable when using the current quoting algorithm.
>
> For a testcase, just run 'head /var/log/messages | mail your@email.address'
> and hit the reply button. For such mails it's absolutely required that the
> date doesn't end up halfway a line due to merging.
>
> There is a workaround already in KMail, which is disabling smart quoting.
> That workaround however is almost worse than the problem it addresses:
>
> 1. You end up with very long lines that get wordwrapped by QTextEdit. This
> has a tendency to get very slow easily because the widget isn't that well
> suited to very long paragraphs.
>
> 2. Only the start of a paragraph rather than a line is quoted. This results
> in replies looking line
>
>    > This is the start of a very long paragraph. When the line is wrapped
>    > all
>
>    subsequent lines are not prefixed with the '> ' indent string and thus
>    look really awkward.
>
>    > The next paragraph then starts with a quoting sign again. No need to
>
>    explain that this is really annoying I guess :)
>
> 3. It is a global option, so no mail is smart quoted at all anymore. This
> is the worst when replying to the Outlook crowd, who tend to send very wide
> lines that suffer from #1 and #2 as well.
>
> Ingo mentioned a valid argument AGAINST my patch on IRC that needs some
> thought and discussion, because there's no perfect solution AFAICS: some
> generated mails don't have a User-Agent/X-Mailer set either, but can be
> smart quoted the normal way perfectly well. The best examples for KDE are
> mailman messages and Bugzilla mails.
>
> However, in the case of Bugzilla mails the feature is a double-edged sword,
> because those also often contain console output and backtraces that would
> benefit from my patch.
>
> Ingo just mentioned that a lot of mail on e.g. kde-devel also has no such
> header, so apparently webmailers and such don't set it. That's of course a
> major setback, because it would make it impossible to commit the patch as
> is. The only counter-argument is that my above example in #2 would look
> with my patch like
>
>    > This is the start of a very long paragraph. When the line is wrapped
>    > all subsequent lines are not prefixed with the '> ' indent string and
>    > thus look really awkward.
>    > The next paragraph then starts with a quoting sign again. No need to
>    > explain that this is really annoying I guess :)
>
> and with the normal algorithm like
>
>    > This is the start of a very long paragraph. When the line is wrapped
>    > all subsequent lines are not prefixed with the '> ' indent string and
>    > thus look really awkward. The next paragraph then starts with a
>    > quoting sign again. No need to explain that this is really annoying I
>    > guess :)
>
> I personally think it's an acceptable loss, but I'm not convinced others
> are equally minded. I can already imagine people filing Bugzilla reports if
> the smart quoting breaks occasionally. :(
>
> Suggestions on how to proceed next are welcome, because I've tried to live
> with this situation for over a year now and I'm getting sick of it, so I
> absolutely want a KMail that allows me to reply to syslog mail :)
>
> In the case the patch is rejected and no suitable solution is found then at
> least it's archived here for those brave enough to build from a locally
> patched source...
_______________________________________________
KMail developers mailing list
KMail-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]