bug#32214: [PATCH] 'message-kill-buffer': fix backup delete question

[Sven Willner]

hmm, having a second look into message-disassociate-draft, I am 
still not sure what is supposed to happen there.

anyway, my motivation for the patch was to eliminate a rather 
annoying (since unnecessary) question to remove a non-existing 
backup/auto save file. here is the minimal patch (without any 
further changes to the code) doing so.

I think, it makes sense to also check for the existing file-name 
to only remove a backup file if there is a properly saved message, 
too.

0001-message-kill-buffer-fix-backup-delete-question.patch
Description: Text Data

Noam Postavsky <npostavs@gmail.com> writes:

> Sven Willner <sven.willner@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > also, the 'when' part should only include the actual deletion 
> > of the
> > backup file
> > >     (ignore-errors
> > >       (delete-file auto-save-file-name))
> > rather than also draft diassociation
> > >     (let ((message-draft-article draft-article))
> > >       (message-disassociate-draft)))
> > also fixed in the updated patch.
>
>
> > Subject: [PATCH] 'message-kill-buffer': fix backup delete 
> > question
> >
> > Before 'message-kill-buffer' would ask to delete backup file if 
> > draft has been
> > saved regardless if a backup file has actually been created. 
> > Now only ask if
> > a backup file exists.
>
> > + (when (and auto-save-file-name
> > + (file-exists-p auto-save-file-name)
> > + file-name
> > + (file-exists-p file-name)
>
> Does it still make sense to check for file-name here? If we're 
> just
> deleting the auto save file, we should probably check for that 
> only (but
> see below, I'm not sure if this is actually correct).
>
> > + (progn
> > + ;; If the message buffer has lived in a dedicated window,
> > + ;; `kill-buffer' has killed the frame. Thus the
> > + ;; `yes-or-no-p' may show up in a lowered frame. Make sure
> > + ;; that the user can see the question by raising the
> > + ;; current frame:
> > + (raise-frame)
> > + (yes-or-no-p (format "Remove the backup file%s? "
> > + (if modified " too" "")))))
>
> I wonder if "backup" is meant to refer to the draft copy (as far 
> as I
> can tell (through the many layers of indirection), the draft
> "dissociation" is also some kind of deletion). If so, then I 
> think this
> change isn't a "fix" at all.
>
> > + (ignore-errors
> > + (delete-file auto-save-file-name)))
> > + (let ((message-draft-article draft-article))
> > + (message-disassociate-draft))
> >        (message-do-actions actions))))