These are my points exactly.
What is the problem with automatic deletion (delete then expunge) if they don't have a trash folder? Maybe they don't have a trash folder on purpose? Maybe they want automatic deletion? Who knows... I think it's safer to leave out automatic creation of any folder. Thunderbird does in fact do this but I think it's incorrect. Doesn't anyone read or pay attention to the Unix philosophy anymore?! :)
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:55:00 +0100, Thomas -Balu- Walter list+roundcube-dev@b-a-l-u.de wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 08:46:45AM +0100, Thomas Bruederli wrote:
After following this thread a while, here are my 2 cents about this: I admit that the current behavior is not right because deleting can fail. The patch submitted by Jacob would solve this and that's what IMO should happen. Choice is good, I agree, but I'm not sure how many of the "dummy" users have ever seen the settings for deleting messages in their mail client. The number of configuration parameters an end-user has to deal with should be kept low.
A customer just had a problem last week when he was not able to delete mails too. In his case there was a Trash folder, but he was not subscribed to it.
I am not sure if I like an automatic creation of the "Trash" folder. At least my dad does not know what "Trash" is anyway - he'd want to have "Muelleimer" perhaps. And while talking about the languages... I've seen people with 4 or more "Trash" folders, because different clients used different naming themes.
So having another one added automatically because it's not there is not what I'd like. Please allow people to choose one or allow immediate deletion...
Balu