[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Pan-users] Re: Selecting 'Folders'
From: |
Duncan |
Subject: |
Re: [Pan-users] Re: Selecting 'Folders' |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Aug 2003 18:38:13 -0700 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.3 |
On Thu 14 Aug 2003 04:59, Vigil posted as excerpted below:
> Further, the line count in the article list shows 0 as well, even after I
> select an article.
>
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Vigil wrote:
> >When I select 'Folders' from the submenu in the Group pane, Pan shows a
> > count of 0 for all 'unread' and 'total' messages. It's not until I select
> > a folder until it displays the right counts.
> >
> >Using 0.14.0.94 now but this happened in .93 as well.
Part of the reason behind this is that PAN sort of uses "pseudo-server"
functionality for these groups. IOW, internally, it treats folders as
another pseudo-server, with these two groups, and any others you set up.
Because these aren't REAL groups on a REAL server, however, they work a bit
differently, because PAN doesn't fully emulate a real server. However, you
are right; this behavior should be considered buggy, and PAN should know how
to emulate the real thing well enough to display these items correctly, if it
is indeed going to use this sort of scheme.
The .95 beta should be out shortly. It is in fact one more beta before 0.14.1
than was anticipated, but there were to many changes after .94 to go straight
to release. They did fix a lot of bugs, but as I'm not running CVS, I don't
know if yours was among them. Therefore, I'd suggest filing a bugzilla
report on this (if you can't find any others on it already) but be prepared
to update it for .95. Also, if it's still an issue then, chances are it
won't be fixed until after 0.14.1 stable, because as I said .95 will already
be a beta more than intended, and 0.14.1 needs to be out soon, and this isn't
a show-stopper bug. Thus, be prepared to wait until the 0.14.1.9x beta
series for a fix, and possibly longer if it's going to be hard to implement,
as it's possible this one may be, for the reasons stated above.
--
Duncan - List replies preferred.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin