I've had a couple of users complain about not being able to delete messages.
The cause turns out to be that they don't have a Trash folder.
The attached diff/patch avoids this by creating the Trash folder if it doesn't exist before moving a message into it.
The only problem is that even though the Trash folder is created, it doesn't show up in the folders list until the whole folders list is refreshed.
-- Jacob Brunson Department of Chemistry, BYU
Instead of creating a folder that possibly some people might not want, why not just simply check if there is a Trash folder and if there isn't, simply delete the message and expunge? If there is a trash folder, move it to Trash.
If this sounds better, I can write a quick patch for it.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:17:24 -0700, Jacob Brunson webguy@byu.edu wrote:
I've had a couple of users complain about not being able to delete messages. The cause turns out to be that they don't have a Trash folder.
The attached diff/patch avoids this by creating the Trash folder if it doesn't exist before moving a message into it.
The only problem is that even though the Trash folder is created, it doesn't show up in the folders list until the whole folders list is refreshed.
-- Jacob Brunson Department of Chemistry, BYU
The other reasonable option, and the one that I believe most IMAP clients follow is at initial launch create the folders if they do not exist. This is the solution I would endorse.
-Charles
Dean Jones wrote:
Instead of creating a folder that possibly some people might not want, why not just simply check if there is a Trash folder and if there isn't, simply delete the message and expunge? If there is a trash folder, move it to Trash.
If this sounds better, I can write a quick patch for it.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:17:24 -0700, Jacob Brunson webguy@byu.edu wrote:
I've had a couple of users complain about not being able to delete messages. The cause turns out to be that they don't have a Trash folder.
The attached diff/patch avoids this by creating the Trash folder if it doesn't exist before moving a message into it.
The only problem is that even though the Trash folder is created, it doesn't show up in the folders list until the whole folders list is refreshed.
-- Jacob Brunson Department of Chemistry, BYU
I'm just not sure I like that solution unless you're talking about making local folders. I don't like anything forcing creation of any files or folder on the IMAP server. If roundcube were to create a local trash folder, fine... But forcing the creation of folder on the IMAP server is, in my opinion, incorrect and a bad design practice. Every IMAP client I have used creates local Trash folders and uses those if one does not exist on the IMAP server or you have not specified your IMAP trash folder as the folder to use. I have never had one secretly create an IMAP folder and just assume that's what I wanted.
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:21:07 -0600, Charles McNulty charles@charlesmcnulty.com wrote:
The other reasonable option, and the one that I believe most IMAP clients follow is at initial launch create the folders if they do not exist. This is the solution I would endorse.
-Charles
Dean Jones wrote:
Instead of creating a folder that possibly some people might not want,
why not just simply check if there is a Trash folder and if there isn't, simply delete the message and expunge? If there is a trash folder, move it to Trash.
If this sounds better, I can write a quick patch for it.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:17:24 -0700, Jacob Brunson webguy@byu.edu
wrote:
I've had a couple of users complain about not being able to delete messages. The cause turns out to be that they don't have a Trash folder.
The attached diff/patch avoids this by creating the Trash folder if it doesn't exist before moving a message into it.
The only problem is that even though the Trash folder is created, it doesn't show up in the folders list until the whole folders list is refreshed.
-- Jacob Brunson Department of Chemistry, BYU
I'd have to do some testing to find out exactly what clients create what, but in my IMAP I have Trash, INBOX.TRASH and neomail-trash. I think it's fairly safe to guess where the neomail-trash one came from. Just doing a bit of googling it looks like maybe squirrelmail or IMP created the inbox.trash folder. Anyone out there wanna try deleting their Trash folder to see if Thunderbird recreates it? I'd be willing to bet that it does. I'd try it but I'm not sure how to go about renaming existing IMAP folders.
In any case, I think it's fair to say that at least some major webmail IMAP clients create folders without user input. I do actually agree with you in principle though. What about if we:
- modify the folder subscription page to allow people to designate the
"special folders" (Trash, Drafts, Sent, Inbox)
- upon login, if any of those folders is missing, direct them to the
folder subscription screen along with a message directing them to select the folder that is missing (or create a new one)
This is a much more programming intensive solution, but it's the best one I can come up with.
-Charles
Dean Jones wrote:
I'm just not sure I like that solution unless you're talking about making local folders. I don't like anything forcing creation of any files or folder on the IMAP server. If roundcube were to create a local trash folder, fine... But forcing the creation of folder on the IMAP server is, in my opinion, incorrect and a bad design practice. Every IMAP client I have used creates local Trash folders and uses those if one does not exist on the IMAP server or you have not specified your IMAP trash folder as the folder to use. I have never had one secretly create an IMAP folder and just assume that's what I wanted.
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:21:07 -0600, Charles McNulty charles@charlesmcnulty.com wrote:
The other reasonable option, and the one that I believe most IMAP clients follow is at initial launch create the folders if they do not exist. This is the solution I would endorse.
-Charles
Dean Jones wrote:
Instead of creating a folder that possibly some people might not want,
why not just simply check if there is a Trash folder and if there isn't, simply delete the message and expunge? If there is a trash folder, move it to Trash.
If this sounds better, I can write a quick patch for it.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:17:24 -0700, Jacob Brunson webguy@byu.edu
wrote:
I've had a couple of users complain about not being able to delete messages. The cause turns out to be that they don't have a Trash folder.
The attached diff/patch avoids this by creating the Trash folder if it doesn't exist before moving a message into it.
The only problem is that even though the Trash folder is created, it doesn't show up in the folders list until the whole folders list is refreshed.
-- Jacob Brunson Department of Chemistry, BYU
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 10:02:30 -0600, Charles McNulty charles@charlesmcnulty.com wrote:
I'd have to do some testing to find out exactly what clients create what, but in my IMAP I have Trash, INBOX.TRASH and neomail-trash. I think it's fairly safe to guess where the neomail-trash one came from. Just doing a bit of googling it looks like maybe squirrelmail or IMP created the inbox.trash folder. Anyone out there wanna try deleting their Trash folder to see if Thunderbird recreates it? I'd be willing to bet that it does. I'd try it but I'm not sure how to go about renaming existing IMAP folders.
Indeed, I'm sure some do this. However, I've never been a fan of forcing changes or creating items without user specification. I personally do not use tools / programs that do this without me telling it to.
Example: iTunes. You can tell it to automatically update which will essentially wipe out everything on your iPod if a few things don't match up such as the check on the DB file. If you have it set to automatically update, it will kill everything it see's and remake the DB file and readd the files from your local library. If iTunes did this without giving me the option to turn that feature off, I would never use iTunes and instead use one of the many Linux clients (such as GtkPod) for creating my playlists. However, iTunes does in fact offer a feature to turn this off and allow you to manually update.
Just not a big fan of the program thinking it knows better than the user.
In any case, I think it's fair to say that at least some major webmail IMAP clients create folders without user input. I do actually agree with you in principle though. What about if we:
I knew you'd see it my way. ;)
- modify the folder subscription page to allow people to designate the
"special folders" (Trash, Drafts, Sent, Inbox)
- upon login, if any of those folders is missing, direct them to the
folder subscription screen along with a message directing them to select the folder that is missing (or create a new one)
This is a much more programming intensive solution, but it's the best one I can come up with.
I've personally always been simply a fan of simply deleting the item they wanted to delete, but not expunging. Then, on the mailbox viewing, put a line through the message if the "Deleted" flag is set in the IMAP headers. I know Microsoft's Outlook Express does this, as well as Thunderbird. This lets the user know "Hey, you deleted this. But the server has yet to Expunge."
That's a much quicker solution and seems to be a standard across mail client and doesn't by any means force the user to do what he/she doesn't want to do (i.e. create folders, expunge deleted mail, etc...). It is then up to the user if they want expunge that message.
On the other hand, if they have a trash folder, move it over there. This is as simple as (Pseudo code):
if (empty($trash_folder)) { $imap->delete($msg); } else { $imap->moveToFolder($msg, $trash_folder); }
On the viewbox page, something as simple as:
if ($imap->header[$msg]['Deleted']) { echo "<strike>"; } // Print rest of line here if ($imap->header[$msg]['Deleted']) { echo "</strike>"; }
I guess from there on it would be nice to have an Expunge feature... Especially for the Trash folder. I'm not on the latest CVS branch right now, but I don't think there is one yet.
Dean
-Charles
Dean Jones wrote:
I'm just not sure I like that solution unless you're talking about
making local folders. I don't like anything forcing creation of any files or folder on the IMAP server. If roundcube were to create a local trash folder, fine... But forcing the creation of folder on the IMAP server is, in my opinion, incorrect and a bad design practice. Every IMAP client I have used creates local Trash folders and uses those if one does not exist on the IMAP server or you have not specified your IMAP trash folder as the folder to use. I have never had one secretly create an IMAP folder and just assume that's what I wanted.
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:21:07 -0600, Charles McNulty
charles@charlesmcnulty.com wrote:
The other reasonable option, and the one that I believe most IMAP clients follow is at initial launch create the folders if they do not exist. This is the solution I would endorse.
-Charles
Dean Jones wrote:
Instead of creating a folder that possibly some people might not want,
why not just simply check if there is a Trash folder and if there
isn't,
simply delete the message and expunge? If there is a trash folder,
move
it to Trash.
If this sounds better, I can write a quick patch for it.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:17:24 -0700, Jacob Brunson webguy@byu.edu
wrote:
I've had a couple of users complain about not being able to delete messages. The cause turns out to be that they don't have a Trash folder.
The attached diff/patch avoids this by creating the Trash folder if
it
doesn't exist before moving a message into it.
The only problem is that even though the Trash folder is created, it doesn't show up in the folders list until the whole folders list is
refreshed.
-- Jacob Brunson Department of Chemistry, BYU
<snip> > > I've personally always been simply a fan of simply deleting the item they wanted to delete, but not expunging. Then, on the mailbox viewing, put a line through the message if the "Deleted" flag is set in the IMAP headers. I know Microsoft's Outlook Express does this, as well as Thunderbird. This lets the user know "Hey, you deleted this. But the server has yet to Expunge." > > That's a much quicker solution and seems to be a standard across mail client and doesn't by any means force the user to do what he/she doesn't want to do (i.e. create folders, expunge deleted mail, etc...). It is then up to the user if they want expunge that message.
Please no. I've never had a single client that liked the way that worked. I personally hate it. Thunderbird does not do that (at least not by default). Outlook Express doesn't either I don't think. Outlook is the only thing I've ever seen that does that by default. I would seriously not use roundcube if it did this. That's not a threat since I'm sure the devs could care less about what one user thinks in the grand scheme of things. I'm just letting the devs know how one of their users feels. They are free to tally the votes and make their own decisions.
--Brian Jackson
<snip>
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:51:43 -0600, Brian Jackson iggy@theiggy.com wrote:
Please no. I've never had a single client that liked the way that worked. I personally hate it. Thunderbird does not do that (at least not by default). Outlook Express doesn't either I don't think. Outlook is the only thing I've ever seen that does that by default. I would seriously not use roundcube if it did this. That's not a threat since I'm sure the devs could care less about what one user thinks in the grand scheme of things. I'm just letting the devs know how one of their users feels. They are free to tally the votes and make their own decisions.
--Brian Jackson
I haven't used Outlook Express in quite some time, but in version 6, I'm quite sure it did this. Kmail does it and last time I checked, Thunderbird did if you didn't have a Trash folder and didn't Expunge. I'm not exactly sure why It'd not doing this for you, but it has always been that way for me.
As far as I'm concerned, it's the least intrusive way to handle the situation. Creating a folder without telling a user is just bad design practice. I don't care who has done this... it's wrong and breaks the philosophy of good, practical design.
I'm not sure why you're so upset with striking out messages. If you don't like it, set your mail client to expunge on delete. That cures the problem. I'm sure if roundcube were to do what I suggested, that option would be available as well. What most people need to understand is that IMAP is a flexible protocol, unlike POP3. This flexibility should be exploited at in a user friendly fashion. Not removed because the developers think they know better than the user. Simply striking out a message and having an option to "expunge on delete" for those that don't want a striked out message sitting in ther inbox is a very quick and simple way to cure this problem. Then if you have a Trash folder, it can simply not delete, but move to the Trash folder... So you have 2 solutions to your "I don't like striked out message" problem. With that being said, why would you stop using roundcube if you have 2 options to remove striked out/deleted messages?
My solution adds just one configuration option (Expunge on Delete) and very little code. This keeps the interface clutter free and simple for the user while maintaining the flexibility of the protocol.
Dean Jones wrote:
My solution adds just one configuration option (Expunge on Delete) and very little code. This keeps the interface clutter free and simple for the user while maintaining the flexibility of the protocol.
Thunderbird has the following option in Tools -> Account Settings -> Server Settings
When I delete a message: [drop down list]
- Move it to the Trash Folder
- Mark it as Deleted
- Remove it Immediately
[/drop down list]
I believe that this should be implemented, and then if there is no Trash folder it could simply disallow or hide that option, while still allowing the other two options. I believe that the Trash Folder should still be the default for new installations. It'll cause the least confusion for current users and I believe it's the default for Thunderbird when there is a Trash folder.
As far as the style of a deleted but unpurged e-mail goes, such a style already exists. To see it in use delete a message (without purging it) with another IMAP client then view it in RC. It should be greyed out.
Finally, this feature should not be mutually exclusive of implementing the "select the Trash/Sent/Drafts/Inbox folder" functionality into the folder subscription page, which I still think would be a good idea.
-Charles
Charles McNulty wrote:
As far as the style of a deleted but unpurged e-mail goes, such a style already exists. To see it in use delete a message (without purging it) with another IMAP client then view it in RC. It should be greyed out.
And just to follow this up, we'd need to add a Trash status icon (in addition to the new, replied, etc. icons) and add functionality such that the deleted status of a message can actually be reversed (toggled off/on)
-Charles
Dean Jones wrote:
I'm just not sure I like that solution unless you're talking about making local folders. I don't like anything forcing creation of any files or folder on the IMAP server. If roundcube were to create a local trash folder, fine... But forcing the creation of folder on the IMAP server is, in my opinion, incorrect and a bad design practice. Every IMAP client I have used creates local Trash folders and uses those if one does not exist on the IMAP server or you have not specified your IMAP trash folder as the folder to use. I have never had one secretly create an IMAP folder and just assume that's what I wanted.
I think all the ones I've used (Outlook/OE, thunderbird and squirrelmail) do.
I've also seen recommendations somewhere (cant remember where) about NOT having a "trash" folder and following the IMAP spec. Make it a virtual folder showing all "deleted" items waiting to be expunged. I am aware this will be broken on a lot of clients that "expunge on exit"
(It also breaks my setup where I have a script to remove items from my deleted folder after X days :)
I've also seen recommendations somewhere (cant remember where) about NOT having a "trash" folder and following the IMAP spec. Make it a virtual folder showing all "deleted" items waiting to be expunged. I am aware this will be broken on a lot of clients that "expunge on exit"
Sorry, I should have finished the thread before replying :)
The virtual "deleted items" is still doable though.
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 21:20:00 +0000, Dean Earley dean@earlsoft.co.uk wrote:
Dean Jones wrote:
I'm just not sure I like that solution unless you're talking about
making local folders. I don't like anything forcing creation of any files or folder on the IMAP server. If roundcube were to create a local trash folder, fine... But forcing the creation of folder on the IMAP server is, in my opinion, incorrect and a bad design practice. Every IMAP client I have used creates local Trash folders and uses those if one does not exist on the IMAP server or you have not specified your IMAP trash folder as the folder to use. I have never had one secretly create an IMAP folder and just assume that's what I wanted.
I think all the ones I've used (Outlook/OE, thunderbird and squirrelmail) do.
Thunderbird does not do this. Thunderbird has a LOCAL Trash folder that is uses if you do not specify one to use on the IMAP server. Thunderbird does this correctly, IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if Outloook and OE did this because Microsoft is famous for thinking they know better than the user and creating files/directories/entities or holding them hostage. That's why I personally do not use many Microsoft products... It thinks it knows better than I do and as we can all probably agree with, that's just not always the case. There may be a reason I don't want to create extra folders on my IMAP server. People have freaky reasons for all of this. However, think of a user that comes along, loves Roundcube and then delete's something. He says "Umm... wait a tic. I didn't want to create a new folder. Why is roundcube forcing me to do this?" It's just not a good practice. And I've never been a fan of SquirrelMail. Roundcube is much better than SquirrelMail already.
I've also seen recommendations somewhere (cant remember where) about NOT having a "trash" folder and following the IMAP spec. Make it a virtual folder showing all "deleted" items waiting to be expunged. I am aware this will be broken on a lot of clients that "expunge on exit"
(It also breaks my setup where I have a script to remove items from my deleted folder after X days :)
I could live with a virtual folder. I just don't want us creating folders/files in the background without the users consent. Along with this, I hope to keep the interface easy and clutter free. For example, don't overload the preferences area with pointless configuration options. KISS.
Dean Jones wrote:
I could live with a virtual folder. I just don't want us creating folders/files in the background without the users consent. Along with this, I hope to keep the interface easy and clutter free. For example, don't overload the preferences area with pointless configuration options. KISS.
I think a lot would depend on the implementation to a "virtual folder" scenario, but I know that I don't like the idea of a virtual folder sitting in a list with "real" folders with which you can't tell the difference. That would really confuse the user any time they tried to do something that they could do with a normal folder, but not with a virtual folder (like create subfolders, or move the folder).
I personally think Virtual Folders (at least in this context) will create more problems than they solve. I think Thunderbird has solved the problem rather elegantly with only a single configuration option and endorse their solution.
-Charles
And I've never been a fan of SquirrelMail. Roundcube is much better than SquirrelMail already.
There are still a lot of features lacking for my use.
- Ability to mark an item as unread
- Its slow. On loading a folder, it seems to load 1 or two images for
every item. Once the browser has loaded them all, I can then carry on :) It also has to do this for every email I delete in email view.
I will have a look through the source when I get a chance to see if I can submit any "fixes" :)
I can understand both arguments for/against automatic folder creation.
Please allow me to share my experiences with roundcube deployment so far. There are currently maybe a hundred people using Roundcube in the department (BYU Chemistry) where I work. Their expectation is that webmail works like it does with Yahoo mail or Hotmail, which is that you click delete, and the message is put in a Trash folder. I don't believe that with either of these services I've ever had to create a Trash folder for things to work that way. (Actually, until roundcube, I don't recall ever having to create a Trash folder in my life). The reason I submitted the patch in the first place was because my users were having a hard time figuring out why they had to create a Trash folder and why it wasn't done for them already.
As a system administrator, I need things to work fairly standardly for every one of my 100 users. It is easier for me if all 100 users have a trash folder and it is called Trash, so that when they call me up all in a panic because they can't find a message, I can talk them through how to find it again. The decision to have a trash folder called Trash should be the decision of the system administrator, and not something we confuse the individual users with. Dean Jones has said, "Just not a big fan of the program thinking it knows better than the user." I agree, except in this particular case, it isn't the program verses the user, it is the system administrator verses the user.
Now having said all that, let me talk about the patch I submitted for a second. The patch doesn't just go creating folders. It will only create folders that are in the $rcmail_config['default_imap_folders'] array in the config file. I'm assuming if you don't want the trash folder to be automatically created, then you just remove it from the list of default folders.
A couple other options I think are ok:
- create the default folders ($rcmail_config['default_imap_folders']) if
they don't exist on login
- create only $rcmail_config['trash_mbox'] if it doesn't exist
Dean Jones wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:51:43 -0600, Brian Jackson iggy@theiggy.com wrote:
Please no. I've never had a single client that liked the way that worked. I personally hate it. Thunderbird does not do that (at least not by default). Outlook Express doesn't either I don't think. Outlook is the only thing I've ever seen that does that by default. I would seriously not use roundcube if it did this. That's not a threat since I'm sure the devs could care less about what one user thinks in the grand scheme of things. I'm just letting the devs know how one of their users feels. They are free to tally the votes and make their own decisions.
--Brian Jackson
I haven't used Outlook Express in quite some time, but in version 6, I'm quite sure it did this. Kmail does it and last time I checked, Thunderbird did if you didn't have a Trash folder and didn't Expunge. I'm not exactly sure why It'd not doing this for you, but it has always been that way for me.
As far as I'm concerned, it's the least intrusive way to handle the situation. Creating a folder without telling a user is just bad design practice. I don't care who has done this... it's wrong and breaks the philosophy of good, practical design.
I'm not sure why you're so upset with striking out messages. If you don't like it, set your mail client to expunge on delete. That cures the problem. I'm sure if roundcube were to do what I suggested, that option would be available as well. What most people need to understand is that IMAP is a flexible protocol, unlike POP3. This flexibility should be exploited at in a user friendly fashion. Not removed because the developers think they know better than the user. Simply striking out a message and having an option to "expunge on delete" for those that don't want a striked out message sitting in ther inbox is a very quick and simple way to cure this problem. Then if you have a Trash folder, it can simply not delete, but move to the Trash folder... So you have 2 solutions to your "I don't like striked out message" problem. With that being said, why would you stop using roundcube if you have 2 options to remove striked out/deleted messages?
My solution adds just one configuration option (Expunge on Delete) and very little code. This keeps the interface clutter free and simple for the user while maintaining the flexibility of the protocol.
You are of course right. Choice is paramount. I just had a knee jerk reaction to (what I consider) nightmarish behavior. I'm cool with choice. Not cool with that being mandatory.
--Brian Jackson
I can understand both arguments for/against automatic folder creation.
I've installed RC on our intranet, after having had SM for a while and GroupOffice before that, and I've been finding out that IMAP is not very standard for a standard, interpretations vary. I use it with clients on Macs, PCs running Oulook Express, RC on the server and I have been using "Becky" for years. Our organization is also bilingual, English/French,Which has an incidence on the names of the folders because not all clients allow for label for the folders and show the real names of the folders instead. I've had to fight with programs that insist on naming folders the way they want, ie. "Trash" instead of "trash", etc. I kind of remember "Becky" (my email client) once asking me if I wanted to have folders created on the server. Asking is nice. My two cents!
Hi everybody
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.
I intended to make the Trash folder (as well as the Sent folder) configurable for the admin who sets up RoundCube for a certain environment. For such an environment I can assume that all mail accounts are configured the same (like all having a folder "Trash" or "Deleted messages") and that a unique behavior is preferred. RoundCube should accept the configured settings and create that Trash folder if it does not exist. This is what Thunderbird does by default, I think.
Adding local or virtual folders is not possible right now because RoundCube can not store messages locally (except caching) and I actually wanted to avoid this. Having "local" folders would just mean that some of your messages are stored on the IMAP server, others are kept on the RoundCube server and if you also use a common mail client you will find other messages again on your local hard disk. Is that what people want?
Regards, Thomas
Jacob Brunson wrote:
I've had a couple of users complain about not being able to delete messages.
The cause turns out to be that they don't have a Trash folder.The attached diff/patch avoids this by creating the Trash folder if it doesn't exist before moving a message into it.
The only problem is that even though the Trash folder is created, it doesn't show up in the folders list until the whole folders list is refreshed.
-- Jacob Brunson Department of Chemistry, BYU
Thomas Bruederli schrieb:
Hi everybody
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.
i applied the patch for testing and found out, that courier-imap does not allow to delete the trash folder, but instead unsubscribes from it.
I found out, that even if we are not subscribed to the Trash Folder it's still possible to move messages there (Don't know if it's possible with other folders also). This seems to be possible not only with courier.
I changed the patch a little bit, so that wie check if the folder exists unsubscribed, then we do nothing and continue, else if the folder doesn't exist, we create it.
btw, without having it tested, the admin of a roundcube installation should be able to disable the trash folder behaviour, by using following setting in main.inc.php: // move messages to this folder when deleting them // leave blank if they should be deleted directly $rcmail_config['trash_mbox'] = 'Trash';
Here is a part of the function, i will commit the change if sf is working again.
function move_message($uids, $to_mbox, $from_mbox='') { $to_mbox_orig=$to_mbox; $to_mbox = $this->_mod_mailbox($to_mbox); $from_mbox = $from_mbox ? $this->_mod_mailbox($from_mbox) : $this->mailbox;
if (in_array($to_mbox_orig,$this->list_unsubscribed())) { // mailbox
exists, but is unsubscribed but we can still move messages there } else // make sure mailbox exists if (!in_array($to_mbox, $this->_list_mailboxes()) and !in_array($to_mbox_orig,$this->list_unsubscribed())) if (in_array(strtolower($to_mbox), $this->default_folders)) $this->create_mailbox($to_mbox, TRUE); else return FALSE;
Kind regards
Florian Sperber
Florian Sperber wrote:
Thomas Bruederli schrieb:
<snip>
btw, without having it tested, the admin of a roundcube installation should be able to disable the trash folder behaviour, by using following setting in main.inc.php: // move messages to this folder when deleting them // leave blank if they should be deleted directly $rcmail_config['trash_mbox'] = 'Trash';
I guess leaving the trash folder parameter blank should exactly to that in the current version. The name of the Trash folder is passed to the client and depending on whether this is filled or blank the client tells the server either to move the message to the specified folder or to delete it. The delete command will also be sent if hitting 'delete' when a message already is in the trash folder.
Here's the code in app.js that should handle empty trash_mbox correctly:
if (this.task=='mail' && this.env.trash_mailbox && String(this.env.mailbox).toLowerCase()!=String(this.env.trash_mailbox).toLowerCase())
this.move_messages(this.env.trash_mailbox); else if (this.task=='mail') this.delete_messages();
Regards, Thomas
Here is a part of the function, i will commit the change if sf is working again.
<snip>
Kind regards
Florian Sperber
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
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
Dean Jones wrote:
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?! :)
As I mentioned before, this should be up to the admin who sets up RoundCube. If the server/webmail admin decides to use a folders named "Trash" then the webmail should do exactly what it is told to do. There's a little difference between common mail clients that every user sets up on his home computer and a central webmail service. If you're working in a bug company the mail client is set up and configured by the sysadmin and you usually have to accept the configuration of your environment and most people (users) don't care about it.
Hotmail, GMX and Yahoo mail act the same way. I agree that having 5 different trash folders is not nice and that's the reason why the name of the Trash can be configured and it will appear in the selected localization without creating a folder named "Muelleimer" on the server.
Regards, Thomas
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
Maybe I misread what you said before then.
So, will there be a default behavior for this if the person didn't configure the client with a trash folder?
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:02:28 +0100, Thomas Bruederli roundcube@gmail.com wrote:
Dean Jones wrote:
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?! :)
As I mentioned before, this should be up to the admin who sets up RoundCube. If the server/webmail admin decides to use a folders named "Trash" then the webmail should do exactly what it is told to do. There's a little difference between common mail clients that every user sets up on his home computer and a central webmail service. If you're working in a bug company the mail client is set up and configured by the sysadmin and you usually have to accept the configuration of your environment and most people (users) don't care about it.
Hotmail, GMX and Yahoo mail act the same way. I agree that having 5 different trash folders is not nice and that's the reason why the name of the Trash can be configured and it will appear in the selected localization without creating a folder named "Muelleimer" on the server.
Regards, Thomas
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
Dean Jones wrote:
Maybe I misread what you said before then.
So, will there be a default behavior for this if the person didn't configure the client with a trash folder?
IMO the default behavior would be whatever the admin configures RoundCube. If a trash-folder is specified in config (which is by default "Trash") that folder will be created when attempting to delete a message (and not before that). If no trash-folder is configured, the message will be deleted immediately from the server.
Is that OK for you guys? This implies that whoever set up a RoundCube installation has thought about it and decided what's best for his users or the local environment.
Regards, Thomas
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:02:28 +0100, Thomas Bruederli roundcube@gmail.com wrote:
Dean Jones wrote:
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?! :)
As I mentioned before, this should be up to the admin who sets up RoundCube. If the server/webmail admin decides to use a folders named "Trash" then the webmail should do exactly what it is told to do. There's a little difference between common mail clients that every user sets up on his home computer and a central webmail service. If you're working in a bug company the mail client is set up and configured by the sysadmin and you usually have to accept the configuration of your environment and most people (users) don't care about it.
Hotmail, GMX and Yahoo mail act the same way. I agree that having 5 different trash folders is not nice and that's the reason why the name of the Trash can be configured and it will appear in the selected localization without creating a folder named "Muelleimer" on the server.
Regards, Thomas
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
I think a preferable behavior over being deleted immediately would be to queue it for deletion (using the existing style for deleted but unpurged e-mails)
You'd still need a way to undelete these message though.
-Charles
Thomas Bruederli wrote:
Dean Jones wrote:
Maybe I misread what you said before then.
So, will there be a default behavior for this if the person didn't configure the client with a trash folder?
IMO the default behavior would be whatever the admin configures RoundCube. If a trash-folder is specified in config (which is by default "Trash") that folder will be created when attempting to delete a message (and not before that). If no trash-folder is configured, the message will be deleted immediately from the server.
Is that OK for you guys? This implies that whoever set up a RoundCube installation has thought about it and decided what's best for his users or the local environment.
Regards, Thomas
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:02:28 +0100, Thomas Bruederli roundcube@gmail.com wrote:
Dean Jones wrote:
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?! :)
As I mentioned before, this should be up to the admin who sets up RoundCube. If the server/webmail admin decides to use a folders named "Trash" then the webmail should do exactly what it is told to do. There's a little difference between common mail clients that every user sets up on his home computer and a central webmail service. If you're working in a bug company the mail client is set up and configured by the sysadmin and you usually have to accept the configuration of your environment and most people (users) don't care about it.
Hotmail, GMX and Yahoo mail act the same way. I agree that having 5 different trash folders is not nice and that's the reason why the name of the Trash can be configured and it will appear in the selected localization without creating a folder named "Muelleimer" on the server.
Regards, Thomas
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
-
Brian Jackson -
Brian Jackson -
Charles McNulty -
Dean Earley -
Dean Jones -
Florian Sperber -
Jacob Brunson -
Marc Brunelle -
Thomas -Balu- Walter -
Thomas Bruederli