Am 2004.07.25 14:34 schrieb(en) Carlos Morgado:
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 10:07:54, Steffen Klemer wrote:Am 2004.07.25 01:39 schrieb(en) Carlos Morgado:>> And if you're not convinced yet, try not confused outbox and sentbox ;)Perhaps the System of Outlook Express is a little bit simpler: It places every sent msg in the Sentbox and marks unsend ones - Balsa could cobine a "Resend - Button" in the context menu of msgs in the Sentbox and the need for an Outbox would be out of the world ;)This sounds much worse.a) when you press send&receive sentbox needs to be scanned for unsent messages.
Okay, that IS a problem, but with an index or so it wouldn't be that worse - for imap only a special header-line has to be found...
Or there will be a sentbox _and_ an outbox which is not shown to the user - but every msg found in sentbox and outbox will be marked as "unsend"... (just an idea... ;)
b) it's not easy to notice a problem. if your outbox message count in balsa isn't 0 it's clear there is a problem.
balsa could set the unread count in the sentbox to the number of unsend msgs... (it is clear that sent-messages were read ;) (but it has to state that these are not unread but unsend ones...
c) it lies. messages stuck in the outbox aren't *sent*, they are waiting to be sent.
No it doesn't lie - you would see the status in the message-view...But from the point of the user the message was sent - He pressed the send- button - it's now just a matter of time (or pressing "send/ receive") until the msg will fly away to the recipient.
The only Problem then would be "network in trouble" in connection with an imap-Sentbox - but there could be a fallback ~/.balsa/mbox where all Mailsare (invisible to the user) cached when offline and submitted when the connection is back...as oposed to a local outbox where unset mails are cached ? :)as I said, that mailbox *may* not show in the mblist. i think it's better if it shows but i don't feel particularly strongly about it.
If there is something like an outbox where messages are stored until send it has 2 be shown - as well as there has to be this flag when only using the sentbox... The problem I like to solve is the complex model with 2 Boxes for sent- mail - a new user won't understand it intuitively...
(if you're thinking about offline mode and synchronizing, working patches are welcome ;))
This synchronizing would in fact solve the whole outbox/ sentbox problem - independetly of the used model ;)
But sorry - like always no programming skills...
I think this would be the most obvious and transparent solution for a new user -> To search for (in the mua) sent messages in the "Sentbox" and not2 different ones! (Joe average doesn't care wether the mail is sent transmitted already or not - he just trusts his mua to do it right ;)This is just Wrong. Is that why outlook users call you up asking when you didn't reply to messages they haven't sent yet ?
But this shouldn't happen - when you click send and there is no error-msg the user must be sure that his msg was (or will) be transmitted to the next server...
The problem is the implentation not the idea of throwing away the outbox (or better: of hiding it)
cu /Steffen -- /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign | "The best way to predict X * NO HTML/RTF in e-mail | the future is to invent it." / \ * NO MSWord docs in e-mail| -- Alan Kay
Description: PGP signature