Re: Balsa's thread handling very buggy.

[Peter Bloomfield <PeterBloomfield bellsouth net>]

On 07/15/2003, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
[ snip ]
> What is irritating is that if your mailbox is set up to open with all  
> threads expanded, and you delete a message at the top of the tree,  
> the rest of the tree is collapsed.
> 
> Worse, the thread usually spreads into several subthreads because the  
> parent is gone.. all collapsed.
> 
> Which means if you have a mailbox with a huge thread in it (say 60  
> messages) it becomes very hard to delete that thread .. delete a few  
> messages, the thread changes into several sub-threads, scattered  
> throughout the mailbox, all collapsed, you need to expand them all,  
> start deleting, which results in several collapsed subthreads ...  
> argh!
> 
> IMO there are two bugs here:
> 
> 1. When the parent is deleted, the thread should still be linked
>    together.
>    I'm using JWZ threading, I read the algorithm description, and it
>    should be no problem. Just a UI bug ?
> 2. Deleting a message in a thread should not result in the rest of
>    the
>    thread getting collapsed
> 
> Mike.

Try unchecking `Settings => Preferences => Misc => Delete  
immdediately', and uncheck `Hide deleted' on the same page.  If the  
parent is left in the view but marked as deleted, nothing else changes.

IMO, 1. isn't a bug: When a parent is deleted and removed from the  
view, it's children are promoted to children of the parent's parent, or  
to the top level, if the parent was the head of the thread.  Wherever  
they are, they're then sorted according to whatever sort criterion you  
have set, and the sorting can move them around. We could try to  
temporarily turn off sorting, but (a) I don't know how, and (b) when  
would you turn it back on?

Avoiding 2. would be nice. Marking each message with its state before  
deleting anything, and restoring the state afterwards, might be  
feasible. Going back to the default of expanding everything would, IMO,  
be less desirable, though probably better than the current treatment!

Comments?

Peter