Re: 'Delete' v. 'Move to trash'

[Pawel Salek <pawsa theochem kth se>]

On 01/08/2005 12:40:50 AM, Peter Bloomfield wrote:
> On 01/07/2005 11:26:37 AM, Craig Routledge wrote:
> > On 01/06/2005 11:23:34 PM, Peter Bloomfield wrote:
> [ snip ]
> >> So perhaps the default (initial) binding for `Delete' should
> >> be to a dialog that offers to bind it to either `move to
> >> trash' or `toggle deleted'[1]?  (I believe that's feasible,
> >> right?)
> >
> > That sounds okay.  Although someone might change their mind
> > later. Maybe instead of lots of preferences in the crowded
> > preferences dialog, we could have a "reset mailbox to default
> > settings" command?
> [ snip ]
> > It might be cleaner to have the dialog present three options:
> >   * move to trash
> >   * toggle deleted
> >   * do nothing
>
> OK--here's what I had in mind:
>
> - a new item on the Settings menu, labeled "`Delete' key
>    binding", with programmed accelerator `Delete';
>
> - this item pops up a dialog:

Why not make it a radio submenu? Just an idea...

>    Balsa has no default action when you press the `Delete' key.
>    You can choose to have it:
>    [ ] move selected messages to trash;
>    [x] toggle the deleted flag for selected messages;
>    [ ] do nothing.

Why would one like to have Delete key unbound? Seems unlikely to me  -  
probably because I have this KISS principle written on a yellow note  
that got stuck to my screen.

Besides, I do not quite get why one would want to have a physically  
separate folder for trash. In other words: why Mailbox/Hide/(Un)deleted  
does not work as a quick switch between mailbox and associated trash.  
Is it that such messages are deleted on close, or there is some other  
reason? Because if this is the problem, I can imagine expunging only  
when "empty Trash on exit" option is set. Opinions?

Pawel