Re: thread reading in kmail - howto?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: thread reading in kmail - howto?
- From: Jaye Inabnit ke6sls <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:45:42 -0700
- Message-id: <01052514454200.27662@bogus>
- Reply-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <01052412292904.28755@dbishop>
- References: <01052410283202.05500@bogus> <01052412292904.28755@dbishop>
I wanted to thank those that responded. The advice was very useful and I am
now able to navigate the lists effectively. I don't see a batching option, or
thread delete on kmail - yet. But Now I just read thru the thread and
select it and use the 'd' key. Very nice.
On Thursday 24 May 2001 12:29, David Bishop wrote:
> On Thursday 24 May 2001 10:28, Jaye Inabnit ke6sls wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I really like being able to thread messages on lists, but reading through
> > them is next to impossible. I just finished re-reading the help files but
> > I don't see any way to read the mail without jumping wildly through out
> > read and unread messages.
> > What I would like to do is have my mail sorted by date, then by threads.
> > Now, the first thread that I come to is ok, the next will jump somewhere
> > deep into un-read territory. Finally the next may or may not take me to
> > the next thread. So my next unread message is lost in the depths of
> > unread mails, instead of back to the top to continue reading in a linear
> > date sorted fashion. Other mailers do this?
> > Any help on reading mails with threading enabled would be much
> > appreciated. I'm obviously missing the finer points of this code.
> > tia
> I think your major problem is that (it sounds like) you are deleteing each
> email as you read it. When you do that, Kmail resorts all of the other
> messages in the thread, and splits stuff off/whatnot because the missing
> email can't be referenced anymore. The work around is to read throughout
> the thread, and then delete in batches. For instance, I read your email
> and then the reply by Hendrik before deleting either, because otherwise
> Hendrik's would have dropped four messages down to the bottom of my inbox.
> Not optimal, but as long as kmail immediately moves deleted mail to the
> trash, instead of just "marking" them as deleted (like mutt), this will be
> an issue.
> P.S. I'm not advocating a "mark for delete" paradigm. I much prefer the
> current system. But I do recognize the tradeoff :-)
Jaye Inabnit\ARS ke6sls/TELE: USA-707-442-6579\/A GNU-Debian linux user
Email: email@example.com WEB: http://www.qsl.net/ke6sls ICQ: 12741145
If it's stupid, but works, it ain't stupid. SHOUT JUST FOR FUN.
Free software, in a free world, for a free spirit. Please Support freedom!