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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Feature Request
From:       Stefan Taferner <taferner () salzburg ! co ! at>
Date:       2000-04-27 7:22:46
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Don Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Stefan Taferner wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Steve wrote:
> > > On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Stefan Taferner wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 22 Apr 2000, Steve wrote:
> > > > > Hello:
> > > > >
> > > > > My apologies if this has been covered before. I'm presently running
> > > > > kmail 1.0.29.1 and love it - however it would be very convenient to
> > > > > have a toggle in the message window for unread/read a la M$ OE.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this possible and/or likely? Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Could you explain in detail what you mean, please?
> > > > I have no real idea.
> > >
> > > Sure, a "switch" so that in list view  unread mail is not mixed up
> > > with read mail.  List view can become very cluttered - I like to see
> > > only my unread e-mail in my mail folder, but still have my read mail
> > > viewable by using a toggle switch.
> > >
> > > Does Kmail already have this feature?
> >
> > You mean like clicking on the column header of the column with the status
> > icons?   ;-)
>
> Alternatively he might mean something like Outlook express' "hide read
> messages" option (which does not display read messages in the headers
> list).

Ahh... :-)
Ok, that makes sense.

> > Unfortunately we have to rethink this concept for threaded message
> > lists, however.
>
> Probably hiding read messages in threaded message list view could be made
> to work. Actually I should mention several bugs in threaded message view
> have cropped up and I have been working on them.

Ok, let's hunt the bugs first.

> > Well, maybe we can have one column where the status flags are combined
> > with the sender field for threaded mode, and separated columns in
> > non-threaded mode?   (this paragraph is meant for the kmail developers
> > :-)
>
> Actually I can't see how that would help to be honest.

If you want to sort messages by message status it is easiest (to implement)
if the status is in a column of it's own.  Sorting by status only makes sense
in non-threaded mode, so the status column could be there only in this case.

Kind regards,
Stefan

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