Re: Very disturbing feature in icedove
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 12:36:55PM -0500, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 09:10:46AM -0600, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > I think I'll side with the people who think this obscure use of the word
> > "compact" is a bug in IceDove (and just continue using mutt).
> >
> Ever have a huge mbox? Mayb 10,000 or 50,000 messages? Would you be
> really annoyed if you pressed delete and took 5 minutes before your MUA
> was responsive again? That is why it does things the way it does. If
> you delete the first message out of a very large mbox and the MUA
> actually removes the message, it will take a long time. Hence, the
> tagging and only actually removing it on the compact operation.
Please note the lack of any complaint about tag-then-delete in my
earlier post. I even mentioned that I will continue to use mutt, which,
as has been mentioned earlier in the thread, also uses a tag-then-delete
model, although mutt continues to show messages marked for deletion (with
a "D" status marker so you know they've been marked but not really
deleted, as opposed to hiding them so it looks like they've been deleted
when they really haven't been).
I was complaining solely about the use of "compact" to mean "delete".
Just because Microsoft chooses to arbitrarily redefine words does not
mean that we should follow them in doing so.
--
Windows Vista must be the first OS in history to have error codes for things
like "display quality too high"
- Peter Gutmann, "A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection"
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
Reply to: