[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [VM] VM writes r/o folders

From: John Hein
Subject: Re: [VM] VM writes r/o folders
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:06:03 -0700

Uday Reddy wrote at 01:20 +0000 on Feb 15, 2012:
 > >  (b) 8.1.1 gets this right.  It doesn't add the 'filed' mark when you
 > >      file a message from within a r/o folder.  And if you use
 > >      vm-set-message-attributes, it whines that the folder is r/o.
 > >      folder).  So it's just a "simple matter" of finding the diff from
 > >      8.1.1 to 8.2.0 that causes the regression.
 > I will double check.  But I think the current behaviour is still the same.

I tried to reproduce it to find where after 8.1.1 the behavior changed,
and now I can't produce the problem (in a new emacs/vm session).  So
it was either some odd state vm got into or something I fouled up when
I tried to see the issue Julian reported (probably the latter).

 > > In fact, I think I would prefer that for read-write folders that have
 > > old attributes.  That is, update the attributes in memory and don't
 > > mark the folder changed for just folder attribute changes.  Then if
 > > you don't make any other changes and then do vm-quit or
 > > vm-quit-no-change, vm just quits the folder without saving the updated
 > > attributes (and without asking you to save the [internal] folder
 > > attributes change).  If you do make "real" changes, then vm saves the
 > > updated attributes along with those changes.
 > Yes, this behaviour has changed from 8.1.1 to 8.2.0.  The old code
 > was not marking the buffer as modified.  I will reset it back to
 > the old way.


 > However, note that Kyle Jones's comment in the code says this:
 >   ;; tink the message stuff flag so that if
 >   ;; the user saves we get rid of the old
 >   ;; short vector.  otherwise we could be
 >   ;; dealing with these things for all
 >   ;; eternity.
 > Personally, I can't see what is wrong with keeping old formats "for
 > all eternity", but I haven't thought it through fully.  I just
 > think it is safer to upgrade old formats to new ones in general.

Nothing wrong I can think of either, except a bit more work for vm
each time the old folder is loaded or missing features.

One disadvantage to upgrading old formats to new is when you try to
load new formats in older versions of vm.  But that's a separate

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]