GNU bug report logs -
#68369
[BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting from message #22
Previous Next
Reported by: rameiko87 <at> posteo.net
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 13:59:03 UTC
Severity: wishlist
Tags: notabug
Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your message dated Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:31:36 +0200
with message-id <8334uvb19z.fsf <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#68369: [BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting from message #22
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #68369,
regarding [BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting from message #22
to be marked as done.
(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)
--
68369: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=68369
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
A. Open any Rmail mailbox with at least 22 messages. Suppose for
simplicity that this Rmail mailbox is connected via imap to a remote
mailbox which won't receive any new message for the duration of our
experiment.
B. Place yourself over any message from 1 to 21: the echo area says
nothing. Now press the key "g" to update your mailbox, the echo area
displays "0 new messages read"
C. Place yourself over message number 22 or higher (say we choose number
22): the echo area now says "Showing message 22...done"!! Now press the
key "g" to update your mailbox, the echo area now displays "Showing
message 22...done"!!
What is going on from message #22?
[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]
> From: Richard Stallman <rms <at> gnu.org>
> Cc: rameiko87 <at> posteo.net, 68369 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 22:37:56 -0500
>
> > > It is not a matter of explanation -- rather, is there a way to
> > > modify the feature a tiny bit such that its meaning will be evident.
>
> > Sorry, I still don't think I follow. What kind of changes in the
> > feature you had in mind that would make its meaning evident?
>
> I don't have any specific ideas for that feature. I'm suggesting that
> other people look for interface ideas to make this more self-explanatory.
> Maybe we will find one. If not, well will still have the option of
> trying to explain it better.
>
> If we don't find one, we will still have the option of documenting it
> better.
Thanks, I made the doc string more clear about the effect of the
option, and I'm therefore closing this bug.
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 121 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.