On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 20:06 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 01:09 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 22:52 -0400, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > > I'm speechless. Was this done because some IMAP servers were buggy? If > > > not, there would seem to be no justification for it. > > > > I believe it was done in order to fix inconsistencies in the unseen > > counts on folders when the strange client-side Junk processing isn't > > disabled. The Junk processing hides messages from a folder and pretends > > that those messages actually exist in some other fake folder. And thus > > the unseen counts in the real folder looked wrong, because some of the > > unseen messages were hidden from view. > > > > The simple option might have been to mark the messages as read when we > > decided they were junk. That wasn't what was done, though -- instead of > > just being able to ask the server "how many unseen messages are there in > > this folder" we now have to fetch the flags for _every_ mail in the > > folder and count the ones which are unseen but not 'junk'. > > Man, that's just... Messy. Instead of hiding them, what if a > new "subject pane" column "Junk" were created (kinda like > "Flagged!"). A Stored Search (nee Virtual Folder) would list > all the Junk. > > But would that also require re-fetching all mails? > > Or, just *really* move them to the Junk Folder?
The Junk folder already is a vfolder. poc _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
