Re: [Evolution-hackers] Re: [Evolution] Updates of Vfolders

[Scott Dixon <scott metaphorics com>]

On 20 Jan 2001 19:42:55 +1030, Not Zed wrote:
> On 19 Jan 2001 21:40:59 -0800, Scott Dixon wrote:
> > On 20 Jan 2001 13:54:59 +1030, Not Zed wrote:
> > > On 18 Jan 2001 14:24:30 -0500, Dan Winship wrote:
> > > > > Or at least the message you are currently reading shouldn't go away
> > > > > due to filters! Outlook has a view for unread messages and I think
> > > > > they disappear as soon as you move to the next message.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, I think that's what we want to do: have all vfolder changes be
> > > > reflected immediately, but tweak things so that the currently-selected
> > > > message can't be removed from the message-list until you select
> > > > another one.
> > >
> > >
> > > This will be a mess to implement, like a huge mess.
> >
> > Not having looked at the code, I'll take your word on that...
> >
> > > I think some things like 'vfolders that only show unread mail', simply
> > > do not make sense, and i think a vfolder + hiding-on-startup combination
> > > could be used to effect the desired result cleaner.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean by "vfolder + hiding on startup".  If you
> > mean that the contents of the vfolder are updated every time you enter
> > the vfolder, then that is OK by me.  I can live with the read messages
>
>
>
> > hanging around until the next time the vfolder is refreshed by selecting
>
> Hmm, i'm not sure this is really doable either.  hiding is another
> feature, not to do specifically with vfolders, which can hide certain
> messages.  there is an idea to have the ability to specify a certain
> hide rule to be run each time you begin.

OK, I see what you mean.  Currently the hide rules have to be applied
manually so if you apply "Hide Deleted Messages" and then delete some
more messages they don't automatically disappear.

> > it.  As long as the contents are correct for the filters when the folder
> > is selected.  Currently the behavior is simply incorrect.  That is, you
> > can specify a vfolder filter rule which is not obeyed.  So the contents
> > of the vfolder do not correspond to what the rule says.  Either take out
>
> I'm sorry?  What are you talking about?

What I meant is that you can currently specify a rule to select the
contents of a vfolder (like for example, that the vfolder should contain
all unread messages or all messages marked important, etc) but the
vfolder will not contain the messages that correspond to that rule
except when Evolution first starts up.  As you change the status of
messages by, for example marking them as important or reading them, the
vfolder contents will not be updated appropriately.  So the contents of
the vfolder don't correspond to what the rule specifies it's contents
should be, right?  This is in contrast to those vfolders whose rules,
like selecting on a pattern in a sender, are such that the contents of
the vfolder is correct always.  Since the sender of a message isn't
changed after the message is received,  updating the contents of the
vfolder when Evo starts and when new mail is received is enough to keep
the contents of such vfolders up-to-date, right?  Not true for rules
based on message status. So my feeling is that it is probably going to
be confusing to users to have some vfolders whose contents are
up-to-date and some vfolders whose contents are only correct when Evo
starts up, but not necessarily at any other time.  So my suggestion is
that you either keep all vfolders up to date or remove the ability to
specify vfolder rules which can't be kept up to date (like rules for
message status).  That way, all vfolders act in the same way.  I don't
see the point in having some vfolders whose contents aren't in synch
with the current state of the message store.   But perhaps it is useful
in some way I don't understand?
>

> > the rule specifiers that you can't keep current with (like all rules
> > having to do with message status or sent/replied to state, for example)
> > or keep the vfolder contents correct with the filter rules.  Only having
> > the right answer when you start up Evolution isn't appropriate behaviour
> > IMHO.
>
> A rather subject opinion.  Isn't that what you specified above anyway?
>
> > Actually, the vfolder contents get updated dynamically now when new mail
> > arrives so I'm not sure what is so hard about updating the contents when
> > you change the status of a message (like by reading it).  
>
>
> Well i know what is so hard about it.

Fair enough.  I guess I won't expect to use vfolders which depend on
aspects of messages which can change, like state...

>