Re: [Evolution] Forwarding mail with embedded images

Dear Guenther and list,
   The problem with forwarding mail as an attachment is that
you don't get to edit it.  This is unacceptable when dealing
with personal matters and so I do not want it to be my default.
This may be a feature that is needed in a business environment,
but not for personal use.

IHMO a mail is a document and may not be edited when forwarding.
Forwarding means, I am sending the mail as is, including the headers
(and thus the original author).

If you want to edit the mails content, you may just as well Reply and
change the recipient.

Similarly with not being able to
edit a message before saving it (for example, to delete long
included threads or other attachments as a previous poster

Not sure if I understand what you mean. But if you really do save a
mail, please note that you save a *mail*. Including headers and stuff.
Saving the mails contents is not saving a mail.

The same goes with "removing attachments from a mail in my folder",
which was discussed quite often in the past. This alters the mail and
thus is not what the sender intended it to be.

   So I do hope the developers will provide a way to allow Evo
to be configured to permit editing of emails before storing and/or
forwarding (I was told in an earlier post that all forwarding
would be as an attachment in future versions).
   If necessary for business users, it would be reasonable
to have this option under root control.

"Editing a mail before saving" would need Evo to be some kind of a
general purpose mail format editor, which it is not (currently). This
would require quite a lot of new code and a new UI. Don't hold your
breathe for this one, but feel free to file it as a feature request in

Regarding forwarding: I do use "forward attached" exclusively, and I
believe this is the way to go. Nonetheless I think at least having the
options around as in 2.2 and previous versions is just fine, and they
should not be removed. Unfortunately I don't recall if this actually
vanished from 2.4 -- if it did, I consider this to be a flaw.

Anyone who can verify this and cares can raise it as a regression bug in
bugzilla. Any takers? (I'm still using 2.2)

Note, all above is my personal, not so humble opinion. Feel free to have
your own.


char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0  ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}

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