[Users] [Bug 2035] don't download attachments when opening mail for reading

[noreply at thewildbeast.co.uk]

http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2035

--- Comment #15 from Andrey Gursky <andrey.gursky at e-mail.ua> ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > as long as not the whole Claws Mail code is rewritten and still consists of
> > Sylpheed code, the connection remains in my opinion. 
> 
> I'm talking about facts, not opinions.

The code is a fact. Connection I treat as opinion.

> > These portions of code
> > have been maintained in Sylpheed but remain as-is (sometimes meaning
> > unfixed) in Claws Mail.
> 
> What remains 'unfixed', aside from bug #2173, (which is a feature request).

Unfortunately this is an extremely important feature. Now I recalled the second
issue: html entities are shown not decoded, just like here [1] and perhaps
related to [2].

> > Thanks for suggestion. There are many things to fix, that Claws Mail
> > developers are not interested in,
> 
> I am one of those developers and I can't think of any things to fix that
> Claws Mail developers are not interested in. Since you know us better than
> we know ourselves, perhaps you can provide further information on that.

By "not interested" I mean "to implement themselves" not "that would be nice to
have".

> > I'd be glad to contribute to Claws Mail too, once/if here would be more
> > maintaining responsibility feeling, responsiveness (and support due to
> > larger code base and libetpan integration).
> 
> We can't control how you feel. This project is around 15 years old, so it is
> hard to imagine where you get these notions. (Which makes me wonder if
> you're just trolling.)

15 years could be heavy burden for software.

I've got them from my own experience: no response for both critical issues I
encountered with Claws Mail, which forced me to switch to Sylpheed, where I had
to fix something also but not so much as I'd had in Claws Mail.

And I'm not alone. Bug opened (maybe patch proposed):
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1884
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2001
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2149
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2550
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2969
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3192
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3518
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3601
...
but no substantial response, no status change to more-info, milestone or
help-needed.

debug log requested
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3278
and no reply after it has been collected, supplied and additional comments were
provided.

Such an asynchronous communication, that prevents the bug to be fixed:
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2257
And I suspect, this could be related to the one I've encountered recently:
BODY.PEEK[1.HEADER] returns NIL only with MS Exchange IMAP but works perfectly
with any other IMAP servers I'm using. Any clue?

And here it is a very nice exception from the above samples:
http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1953
Though, the issue will not be fixed, but at least there is a technical
explanation, allowing someone to go on with it (but the status remained NEW).

I agree, it is a general problem not unique to Claws Mail. And hope despite of
our different view on the same thing we could continue to communicate polite
enough. What do you think about to propose code stubs for this and other bugs,
since you're the most familiar with the code and could know the best place
something should be implemented in?

[1]
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/149223/how-to-convert-html-entities-to-readable-text
[2] http://www.thewildbeast.co.uk/claws-mail/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3192

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.