Hallo Mica, On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:40:02 +0200GMT (26-10-2004, 13:40 +0200, where I live), you wrote:
>> I'd be very surprised if such a wish would be fulfilled. >> It would be a departure from the current way of thought behind TB. >> It would mean TB would change messages after/on sending them. >> TB's strongest feature until now is that it doesn't do that. MM> Netscape Messenger is an example having such feature, and it is quite MM> simple, normal, and standard one. Actually, telling me that some other client has the same feature won't mean that it is something TB should do too. TB doesn't rewrap a message before sending either even though there some clients that do so. When I save a message, that's the one that gets sent and the message that gets sent is the message that is stored in 'Sent mail' (or whatever folder you're filtering it too), that's a feature of TB and a major one too. MM> It is a moment when your message lives your computer/MUA. Let's use the moment the message leaves the mua (with all those proxies scanning for viruses and I don't what else it's rather hard to say when it leaves your computer). And leaving should be defined as the time that the smtp server has acknowledged receipt, not the beginning of the transfer. MM> What duplicated messages? When the message is sent, the "stamp" is MM> written in headers, and the copy with the identical headers is MM> delivered to your sent folder as well, so that you have evidence MM> where it is sent, without complicating things by sending to MM> yourself the copies. Not sure whether I follow you completely. Do you want two copies of the message, one as it was sent and one with a time stamp? MM> *If* adding such a simple feature to TB would be "a departure from MM> current way of thought behind TB", then it is simply badly considered MM> way. There is nothing more normal and logical than putting a stamp on a MM> letter's cover. The date of creating is in the letter itself, and date MM> of sending is on its cover. Yeah, but what you're suggesting isn't quite the same. You send a message and keep a copy and now you're talking about adding a date to that copy in a way that it's indistinguishably what has been added to your copy and what was their originally. When you want a date stamp on the envelope, ask for an additional column, that would be saved in the .tbi file. I can imagine that I'd support such a wish. MM> "Way of thought" should be in accordance with factual processes of MM> mailing. Well, if we are dealing with mailing. The way of thought behind TB is that a received or sent message should not be altered without altering the message-id. You don't have to agree with that, but that's the way TB is written and it is in full accordance with the relevant RFC's that say that no two different messages should carry the same message-id. -- Groetjes, Roelof Say it with flowers. Give her a Triffid!!!! The Bat! 3.0.2.1 Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 1 pop3 account, server on LAN
pgpRhNjby6aZQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________ Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
