Re: set up trash for deleted messages
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, January 14 at 05:59 PM, quoth Francis Moreau:
>On Jan 14, 2008 5:59 PM, John Velman <velman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> This works for me ( in .muttrc).
>>
>> _________
>>
>> # poor mans trash
>
>Honestly I'm wondering what's wrong with Trash.
>
>It seems that Trash is not really welcome in Mutt.
By what metric? The fact that support for it isn't built-in (added via
two simple hooks or via the trash patch linked on the mutt webpage:
http://cedricduval.free.fr/mutt/patches/#trash) or are you seeing some
sort of wider hostility to the existence of folders with that name?
One way of understanding mutt's approach to email is as an email
"viewer". Mutt, given a folder, does its level best to manage that
folder of email. Mutt is not targetted to managing a large collection
of many folders of email; it has no support for searching multiple
mailboxes at the same time, displaying messages from multiple
mailboxes, displaying messages from multiple accounts, automatically
transferring messages from an "INBOX" to other folders when you open
the INBOX, etc. When viewing the contents of a folder, mutt makes *no*
assumptions about the existence of ANY other folder or account. In
that sense, mutt approaches mail very differently from other email
applications: mutt does it on a folder-by-folder basis, while other
applications (e.g. Thunderbird) approach it on an account-by-account
basis. When you think about email on an account-by-account basis,
things like folders with special purposes makes more sense. Thus, in
other applications, "delete means move to the account's Trash folder"
makes sense, while in mutt "delete means mark the message as deleted"
makes more sense (why would mutt assume that you have (or should have)
a special folder for deleted messages? By moving the message to a
Trash folder, you are losing the information about where it came
from.).
However, you can easily make mutt behave more like an "email is an
account" program by using hooks and other configuration features, and
if that isn't enough, you can even patch mutt to add the functionality
in a form you find personally palatable.
What the trash patch does can be replicated by modifying your
configuration, so there is no strong movement among the development
group to add it to the tree, because that is essentially bloat (why
add a second way of doing the same thing?).
~Kyle
- --
Formal symbolic representation of qualitative entities is doomed to
its rightful place of minor significance in a world where flowers and
beautiful women abound.
-- Albert Einstein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: Thank you for using encryption!
iD8DBQFHi5vXBkIOoMqOI14RAvcmAJ9Ort3atVM8aqlDUb12k3a+3X+SOwCfadlU
OXPJFyeC9qQ8XEYgBNinmRA=
=6PNi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----