Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 104430 - mutt flag_safe behaviour request
Summary: mutt flag_safe behaviour request
Status: RESOLVED NEEDINFO
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All All
: High enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED)
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2005-08-31 15:44 UTC by Fernando Canizo
Modified: 2006-09-11 07:36 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
ebuild that applies D. Champion patch to mutt (mutt-1.5.8-r2.ebuild,4.63 KB, text/plain)
2005-08-31 15:48 UTC, Fernando Canizo
Details
the D. Champion patch in case his site is down (patch-1.5.8.dgc.flagsafe.1,1.52 KB, patch)
2005-08-31 15:49 UTC, Fernando Canizo
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Fernando Canizo 2005-08-31 15:44:59 UTC
In mutt you can flag a message with command 'flag-message' (F), this marks the
message as important. Also there exists the 'delete-thread' (CTRL-d). The actual
behaviour is that no matter if message is flagged, it gets removed when hitting
'CTRL-d'.

The *desired* behaviour is that flagged message remain imposible to delete until
flag is removed by hand.

Note: if you flag a message, that means it's important to you, so you don't want
to loose it if you ctrl-d the thread later when, say, thread gets off-topic.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. start mutt
2. find a thread of at least two mails in one of your boxes
3. flag one message (flag-message command, F in my mutt)
4. go to the next message
5. issue the 'delete-thread' command (ctrl-d in my configuration, wich i believe
is the default one)

Actual Results:  
Flagged message get marked for deletion and is gonna be lost when you leave mutt
or change folder.

Expected Results:  
Don't remove flagged messages. Only permit removal if flag is removed first.

This is solved for mutt 1.5.8-r2 (i think any 1.5.8 would serve) by the David
Champion patch that you can find at:
http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/sw/mutt/patch-1.5.8.dgc.flagsafe.1

I have done the ebuild that applies it too, but this is my first bug report
ever, and don't see a way to add it here. Will search how to do later.
Comment 1 Fernando Canizo 2005-08-31 15:48:48 UTC
Created attachment 67373 [details]
ebuild that applies D. Champion patch to mutt
Comment 2 Fernando Canizo 2005-08-31 15:49:37 UTC
Created attachment 67374 [details, diff]
the D. Champion patch in case his site is down
Comment 3 Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-09-10 03:56:06 UTC
I'm a bit reluctant to adding yet more patches to mutt... If you *really* need this patch in the gentoo patchset then please rebase it on top of patch 06-pgp_timeout (from our patchset).

- ferdy
Comment 4 Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-09-11 01:12:14 UTC
Resolving as NEEDINFO until said patch (rebased) is provided.

- ferdy
Comment 5 Fernando Canizo 2006-09-11 06:14:55 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> I'm a bit reluctant to adding yet more patches to mutt... If you *really* need
> this patch in the gentoo patchset then please rebase it on top of patch
> 06-pgp_timeout (from our patchset).
> - ferdy

After more than a year after i posted the feature *and* its solution you tell me you are "a bit reluctant"? You could have said that the day after man!

I consider this feature a must, thus yes: "i really need it". Is a must because what's the point of flagging a message if you can inadvertently delete it? If you flagged it is because is important or you need it.

I have it implemented since before i posted the feature request so i will not care to rebase the patch, not after seeing my bug report dormant for more than a year, help yourself with the rebased patch if you like.

I have already my mutt as i want it. This was to help other users who might not take the work to find their own solutions.

Thank you for your time.
Comment 6 Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-09-11 06:18:42 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> After more than a year after i posted the feature *and* its solution you tell
> me you are "a bit reluctant"? You could have said that the day after man!

Of course I was not the mutt maintainer and I've just read this bug report. Next time you should probably hire a Gentoo developer if you need '0-day' answers to your reports.

> I consider this feature a must, thus yes: "i really need it". Is a must because
> what's the point of flagging a message if you can inadvertently delete it? If
> you flagged it is because is important or you need it.

I don't know and I don't care, take it upstream. The default behaviour works for me.

> I have it implemented since before i posted the feature request so i will not
> care to rebase the patch, not after seeing my bug report dormant for more than
> a year, help yourself with the rebased patch if you like.

Good, thanks for a useless post then.

- Fernando "tired of people demanding things for free" Pereda

Comment 7 Fernando Canizo 2006-09-11 07:36:07 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > After more than a year after i posted the feature *and* its solution you tell
> > me you are "a bit reluctant"? You could have said that the day after man!
> 
> Of course I was not the mutt maintainer and I've just read this bug report.
> Next time you should probably hire a Gentoo developer if you need '0-day'
> answers to your reports.

Of course i didn't know that, maybe you could have started your first post saying that, sorry if i heart your feelings.

Try to stand in my shoes for a minute: i take the time to give a full solution and the maintainer or whoever was in charge only needed to give it a shot: take what i sent and try it (it worked then and it works now, i can assure that). How much time would have it taken? 5-10 minutes?

So please, understand my frustration when i received your answer, i didn't know which maintainer was before nor now.

> > I consider this feature a must, thus yes: "i really need it". Is a must because
> > what's the point of flagging a message if you can inadvertently delete it? If
> > you flagged it is because is important or you need it.
> 
> I don't know and I don't care, take it upstream. The default behaviour works
> for me.

The patch provided left mutt with default behaviour, nothing was changed on the "defaults". But also allowed the possibility to set the behaviour i proposed.

> > I have it implemented since before i posted the feature request so i will not
> > care to rebase the patch, not after seeing my bug report dormant for more than
> > a year, help yourself with the rebased patch if you like.
> 
> Good, thanks for a useless post then.

It was not useless, was a feature request *with* its solution attached. All i wanted was someone had read it and tried.

> - Fernando "tired of people demanding things for free" Pereda

I was not demanding anything for free. I was giving for free. I'm trying to be nice despite being a little bit frustrated, excuse me if i was a little harsh with you.

Just close it if you're not interested in this because i will not invest more time in it. Again sorry about all.