On Tue,  2 Apr 2013 at  9:27:19 +0300, Gabriel VLASIU wrote:
> 
> That I do not understand is why you removed functionality from wmbiff? Why 
> not adding a command line switch (let's say - classic mode) in which you 
> the keep old behavior for wmbiff. And do whatever you want with the 
> 'new' mode. For 'others'.

In hindsight that would have been better, yes. At at the time I just
wanted to get rid of those big meaningless numbers overlapping my
mailbox labels and I really thought that the change would be 
uncontroversial.

> > > Yes, I know, there is a limit but most of us rarely reach this limit.
> > 
> > _I_ reached that limit and that motivated the patch. 
> OK. I reached that too many times. So what?
> I reached that limit with new mails either. And your patch does not solve 
> this.

If you have more than 10k new emails you'll have the same problem, indeed.
I've never reached that limit in mailboxes I care and I hope to never
reach that limit, actually. 

But the day when I need to take action upon 10k new emails will be a
_bad_ day anyway, so in that case I won't even have the free time to
bother about wmbiff.

As you see, I did something about the case I cared about and that makes
sense for me.

You have another view and I respect that. But you also said that your
wmbiff with your patches was doing the thing you wanted it to do, so
that's a solution.

Another solution would be to implement the -classic switch you mentioned.





-- 
To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].

Reply via email to