Re: [Evolution] Alternative to Evolution's trash handling

[Philippe LeCavalier <support plecavalier com>]

On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 11:56 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On 09/29/2009 11:37 AM, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 11:30 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> >
> >> On 09/29/2009 10:56 AM, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> >>> What about a move to trash allure? Seems like that might satisfy Everyone's concern...Sometimes the technically correct choice isn't always practical;-)
> >>
> >> You'll have to explain that. I don't know what you mean by "trash allure".
> >>
> >> poc
> >
> > Just make the Trash folder act like the search folders. So you're
> > keeping the mark for deletion style but a copy(linkto the msg) is
> > visible in the "Trash" folder. This way you're not changing any protocol
> > or technology applied, your just playing with the way deleted messages
> > are seen...just a thought.
>
> How is that different from the way the Trash folder already works? Trash 
> *is* a search folder. The contents are physically in the same place they 
> were before being deleted. They haven't been moved (and don't have to be 
> moved back if they're undeleted). That's the whole point.
>
> The Junk folder works the same way BTW.
>
> poc
I guess I'll vote for keeping things the way they are then

Cheers,
Phil