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