Dean Jones wrote: > Maybe I misread what you said before then. > > So, will there be a default behavior for this if the person didn't configure > the client with a trash folder?
IMO the default behavior would be whatever the admin configures RoundCube. If a trash-folder is specified in config (which is by default "Trash") that folder will be created when attempting to delete a message (and not before that). If no trash-folder is configured, the message will be deleted immediately from the server. Is that OK for you guys? This implies that whoever set up a RoundCube installation has thought about it and decided what's best for his users or the local environment. Regards, Thomas > > On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:02:28 +0100, Thomas Bruederli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> Dean Jones wrote: >>> These are my points exactly. >>> >>> What is the problem with automatic deletion (delete then expunge) if >> they don't have a trash folder? Maybe they don't have a trash folder on >> purpose? Maybe they want automatic deletion? Who knows... I think it's >> safer to leave out automatic creation of any folder. Thunderbird does in >> fact do this but I think it's incorrect. Doesn't anyone read or pay >> attention to the Unix philosophy anymore?! :) >> >> As I mentioned before, this should be up to the admin who sets up >> RoundCube. If the server/webmail admin decides to use a folders named >> "Trash" then the webmail should do exactly what it is told to do. >> There's a little difference between common mail clients that every user >> sets up on his home computer and a central webmail service. If you're >> working in a bug company the mail client is set up and configured by the >> sysadmin and you usually have to accept the configuration of your >> environment and most people (users) don't care about it. >> >> Hotmail, GMX and Yahoo mail act the same way. I agree that having 5 >> different trash folders is not nice and that's the reason why the name >> of the Trash can be configured and it will appear in the selected >> localization without creating a folder named "Muelleimer" on the server. >> >> Regards, >> Thomas >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:55:00 +0100, Thomas -Balu- Walter >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 08:46:45AM +0100, Thomas Bruederli wrote: >>>>> After following this thread a while, here are my 2 cents about this: >>>>> I admit that the current behavior is not right because deleting can >>>>> fail. The patch submitted by Jacob would solve this and that's what >> IMO >>>>> should happen. Choice is good, I agree, but I'm not sure how many of >> the >>>>> "dummy" users have ever seen the settings for deleting messages in >> their >>>>> mail client. The number of configuration parameters an end-user has to >>>>> deal with should be kept low. >>>> A customer just had a problem last week when he was not able to delete >>>> mails too. In his case there was a Trash folder, but he was not >>>> subscribed to it. >>>> >>>> I am not sure if I like an automatic creation of the "Trash" folder. >>>> At least my dad does not know what "Trash" is anyway - he'd want to >> have >>>> "Muelleimer" perhaps. And while talking about the languages... I've >>>> seen people with 4 or more "Trash" folders, because different clients >>>> used different naming themes. >>>> >>>> So having another one added automatically because it's not there is not >>>> what I'd like. Please allow people to choose one or allow immediate >>>> deletion... >>>> >>>> Balu >>> > >
