<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: mutt development status



On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 09:28:31AM +0200, Nicolas Rachinsky wrote:
> * Derek Martin <invalid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2005-07-12 03:18 -0400]:
> > But there is good reason to distinguish between "new" mail, and
> > "unread" mail.  You may not have read a particular message, but from
> > seeing its sender and subject, you may already know that it's a
> > message you don't need to see (or even don't have time to look at)
> > right now.  But as you say, you haven't read it yet, so you want your
> 
> I often open folders without looking at anything of some of the new
> mails. I think these mails should stay new. 

How does marking such mail as "unread" not solve your problem?

> But mutt cannot know, which mails I looked at. 

It absolutely CAN know... it only doesn't by choice of the
maintainers.  Other mailers have been aware of read vs. unread mail
for decades. Literally.

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail.  Sorry for the inconvenience.  Thank the spammers.

Attachment: pgptHydFzaMST.pgp
Description: PGP signature