On Thu Aug 30 2012 Leo wrote: > I just tried it again. Unfortunately by default it pops up an empty > record window (screenshot attached). Something is wrong here.
Now I see what you mean. Yes, there is a simple silly bug here. If there are no records for a message (no existing records and BBDB is configured such that it should not create new records), then BBDB should not pop up an empty *BBDB* buffer. > BBDB of 2012-03-04 actually asks the user whether they want to add > to BBDB. Still that's a separate issue. The old BBDB snapshot you refer to was inconsistent in the sense that bbdb-mua-edit-field-sender did not obey bbdb-mua-update-interactive-p. The code got updated since then to make the behavior among different BBDB MUA commands more consistent. Now they all obey bbdb-mua-update-interactive-p for whether they should only use existing records or possibly also create new ones. Should bbdb-mua-update-interactive-p turned into a list instead of a cons pair to offer yet more flexibility? Roland ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
