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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Why, oh why? -or- scoring
From:       Melchior FRANZ <a8603365 () unet ! univie ! ac ! at>
Date:       2001-06-01 15:12:08
[Download RAW message or body]

* Michael Häckel -- Friday 01 June 2001 16:22:
> For example I download my mails and read through them.
> I reply to a few mails. I see a mail I also want to reply to, but currently 
> don't have enough time, therefore I give it the flagged status.
> Some time later, I finally write a reply and then I don't need the flag any 
> more.

That leads to another (tiny) problem: Whenever I do similar things, I get into
trouble. I have threading activated and if I mark a message flagged it is
quite hard to find that message later, because the thread is likely to be
collapsed then. Wouldn't it be desirable if the topmost message 'inherited'
the state of the most important flag within the thread. That is: if a thread
contains a flagged message, then the collapsed thread shows this flag. If I
replied to any of the messages in the thread, then I would see this on the
collapsed thread. Of course "flagged" would have priority over "replied"
which had priority over ...  (Now you may suggest, that I mark the starting
message instead. Yes, I have to do this now, anyway. But this can't be done
by a filter rule.)
    And then, I would still like a thread-starting message to stand for the
whole thread (like a folder stands for all messages therein). I find it quite
unnatural that I have to expand a thread and select all messages to delete
them. After all, the '+' sign clearly indicates, that this is not just a
message, but a couple of them. So I don't see a danger for stupid users
here.

m.

    
_______________________________________________
Kmail Developers mailing list
Kmail@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail

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