Re: atime/mtime
On Jun 23 21:00, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> Hi Derek, list,
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:33:59 -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> > For what it's worth, the way I would most prefer to process my mail
> > would be like this:
>
> Thanks for this. It pretty much conforms to my work model.
>
> > nagging the user about new mail in folders they visited recently (you
> > would, of course, set mark_old).
>
> The new work model is a large change for myself. If I have no choice, I
> will have to go along and do it that way. I agree that keeping mails
> marked as "new" does not allow differentiation between "now but seen" and
> "new and not yet seen". But it has worked for me so well for such a
> long time. Like you, I don't go to the length to mark/flag emails once
> I've seen them, even at work using Outlook. I just take notice of them,
> and make sure I go through everything which is still marked new later.
> I can't go through the pain of marking tens or hundreds of new mails as
> "check later".
Isn't there a chance to have an option to switch to the old or new
behaviour by user's choice? Even if the old behaviour is thought of as
a bug, the old behaviour was nice, not illogical, and quite a lot of
people, including myself, got used to it and would like to keep using it
since their usage model of mutt is based on it.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Project Co-Leader
Red Hat