On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Rich Lane<rl...@club.cc.cmu.edu> wrote: > Excerpts from Nicolas Pouillard's message of Fri Sep 11 05:16:49 -0400 2009: >> Excerpts from Rich Lane's message of Fri Sep 11 00:45:20 +0200 2009: >> > Excerpts from Carl Worth's message of Wed Sep 09 13:32:30 -0400 2009: >> > > Would it be a small change to move the undo keybinding to somewhere >> > > more universal? >> > >> > No :( >> > >> > > As a first cut, I'd be happy if it just undid the changes to the >> > > index, even without undoing any interface changes. That is, if my >> > > previous command was archive-thread-and-view-next-thread, it would be >> > > OK if it just undid the archiving part. Bonus points if it also undoes >> > > the view-next part, but I can imagine that being more work. >> > >> > I know I sound a bit like a broken record here, but immediate >> > label changes will solve this problem. Then, the undo system would just >> > need to keep a global stack of (msgid, previous_labels). I'm just hoping >> > somebody will volunteer for this - it will be a big patch. >> >> What prevent us from having a global stack of (msgid, previous_labels) in >> the actual settings? > > Hmm, you may be right. I was thinking that changes weren't propagated > between buffers except on save, but that's wrong because UpdateManager > is called in the keybinding. In that case, the user sees a mostly* > linear series of label changes, so it's safe to have a global undo > stack.
he next question is, what else is needed on this undo stack? Are labels the only interaction we have? Here is what come to my mind: * contacts (I more and more think that contacts should not be handled by sup directly, but that's another topic) * drafts -- Nicolas Pouillard _______________________________________________ sup-talk mailing list sup-talk@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk
