Re: Virtual Trash Folder

On 09/20/2005 03:10:47 PM, Pawel Salek wrote:
On 09/18/2005 05:01:41 PM, Craig Routledge wrote:

* deleting from Trash folder permanently deletes message

That's an possibility - apart from the fact that IMAP does not support selective expunge of messages[1], only entire mailboxes - but perhaps this could be solved differently.

[1] unless UIDPLUS extension is present.

Well then we could just stick with "Empty Trash" and remove all the contents at once. Shouldn't be a problem since people can undelete and rescue and individual message -- then clear the rest.

   - do we have a lazy update? (items don't appear in
     Trash until remote mailbox is checked?)

It's a question of taste but I would rather not make the update obligatory.

Sounds fine to me, and should avoid potentially long lookups from holding up initialization.

   - other ideas?

- still use expunge (per mailbox), or just "Empty Trash"
  (all mailboxes)?


If that's what people want. I was just wondering if people actually expunge messages one box at a time? Presumably all messages marked as deleted are no longer of interest; it's just a safety mechanism. Is it done per mailbox for performance reasons? Because it's closer to the way the protocol works? Or do people have a workflow that make this a desirable feature?

- what about same message in two different mailboxes?
   - should be okay if both are clearly labeled in terms
     of originating mailbox

I do not know... I have more questions: How do you uniquely identify a message? What about procmail/sieve delivering copies of the same message to different mailboxes?

Since the Trash is constructed using pointers to the real message (duplicate or not), do we not always know where it came from?


You asked many good questions that are not so easy to answer :). Also, another question to ask is: what do we really win by doing it? You named virtual folders - and that's probably the biggest advantage. In principle, IO load could decrease (apart from the potential problems with tracking deleted messages between sessions) but was it ever a problem?

The two big items I saw were new-user confusion over the two kinds of delete and the desire for virtual folders. I reiterated the idea because it seemed to get a favorable response the last time it was mentioned and I thought it worth discussing. I can certainly live without it, if it looks like more pain than benefit.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]