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

Re: "new" mail (was Re: mutt development status)



On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 09:00:42AM -0700, Will Yardley wrote:
> I agree that it's bad to have inconsistent behavior, and the best
> scenario would be if this were configurable. Are you volunteering to
> come up with a patch? :>  

If I had a reasonable expectation that it would get included, I would
consider it.  But the trouble is I really hate the way new mail is
handled in general, and what I would want to implement is the scheme
I've been describing.  It's a much bigger project.  And as usual, I've
gotten zero feedback from the maintainers about it.  This is the
underlying problem... the maintainers are unresponsive.

> All joking aside, how hard would it be to get this to work with
> mbox? Is it just a matter of touching a folder when leaving if there
> are messages w/ status "New" and the proposed option exists?

The option already exists...  I haven't looked at the code for a
while, but off the top of my head it seems that touching the file
(or the programmatic equivalent, rather: updating the file times) would 
probably solve it.  That is, it would make the behavior consistent.  I
personally still find the resulting behavior to be less than
desirable.

-- 
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: pgpxvkkho5NG9.pgp
Description: PGP signature