Re: RFC mailbox interface

[Carlos Morgado <chbm chbm nu>]

On 2001.11.26 09:38:37 +0000 M . Thielker wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2001.11.26 01:38 Carlos Morgado wrote:
>> 7 items ? you have references to the position of the message in the folder
>> ?
>> 
>> remember, we are talking about deleting. you need to know folder,index
>> tuples
> 
> Hadn't though about the case where someone actually would want VFolders to 
> lose messages when the "original" is deleted - this would never be a

i believe this is the common case no ? if i delete a message i want it gone

> problem when the copy-on-delete option is turned on - it really wouldn't 
> even be a problem if "move to trash" is on.... In either case, no deletion 
> would take place.
> But, yes, after all I'm the one who always talks about _large_ folders, I 
> should have thought about it!
> Still, the same problem would arise in a scenario where VFolders are always 
> seen as references. Copy-on-delete will actually make it appear far less 
> often.
> 
no, with references you can mark the message deleted and keep it's entry on
the mailbox index (like you do now). all views that point to it view it as
deleted. 

> ALso, I have stumbled upon another possible pitfall - assume a VFolder is 
> marked copy-on-delete and persistent and is currently closed. Now, when a 
> message that is referenced by that folder is deleted from it's source 
> folder, the system has no way of knowing that the message should be kept 
> around. Next time the VFolder is opened, the referenced message is gone, 
> while the user would assume that this cannot happen.
> 

i don't see any way around this except keeping mailbox handles at all time

and then you get fun situations like not being able to delete messages
while being disconected ...

-- 
Carlos Morgado - chbm(at)chbm(dot)nu - http://chbm.nu/ -- gpgkey: 0x1FC57F0A
http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ FP:0A27 35D3 C448 3641 0573 6876 2A37 4BB2 1FC5 7F0A
Software is like sex; it's better when it's free. - Linus Torvalds