[PATCH] Add dontAskAgainName parameter to queuedMessageBox()

[Ingo Klöcker]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sunday 06 October 2002 18:13, Thomas Zander wrote:
> Having a dialog like the one you propose allows a user to get a lot
> of dialog on screen when he walks away and the mailbox is and stays
> out of sync due to him not clicking the dialog.
>
> The correct patch would be to fix this in KMail. For example by
> adding a check in front of the code that accesses the mailbox-cache.
> Another solution is that each incoming acount has a 'ok to use' flag
> so a problem in one does not effect another account. Plus you can
> easily disable the account when a problem is found.

There is a misunderstanding. This has nothing to do with accounts but 
with the mail folders in ~/Mail. Everytime KMail opens a folder it 
checks whether the index is still in sync with the contents of the 
folder (by comparing the modification dates of the index file and the 
mail folder file). The problem is now that KMail opens its five system 
folders (inbox, outbox, trash, drafts, sent-mail) on startup. When the 
index of one of these folders is outdated (or seems to be outdated due 
to buggy NFS) KMail shows a message box to inform that user that it had 
to regenerate the index.

BTW, in previous versions of KMail we silently regenerated the index 
files when necessary. And, not surprisingly, we received many bug 
reports from people with NFS mounted homes who wondered wtf messages 
they deleted from their inbox reappeared everytime the left and 
re-entered the folder. The cause for this problem is that the NFS 
client gives KMail wrong file modification dates when the clock of the 
NFS server and the clock of the NFS client are out of sync. All 
workarounds we could think of didn't work. The NFS server/client simply 
tries to be too smart. So in order to no longer make our users wonder 
wtf was going on we decided to show an error message which tells them 
that the index had to be regenerated and which points them to the FAQ 
(that's where a link to help:/kmail/faq.html would be helpful) for more 
information. And we need a "Don't show again" checkbox because some 
people might not have the possibility to fix the problem with the NFS 
servers.

If you have a better idea how we should handle this situation please 
speak up.

> Anyway; your proposal does not look like it embraces good design in
> KMail.

Independently of the question whether this is good design in KMail or 
not please answer the following two questions:

Is there a good reason why a queuedMessageBox should not have a "Don't 
ask me again" checkbox?

Why can't a queuedMessageBox contain links? (Or can it and the AllowLink 
option is superfluous? I didn't try.)

This inconsistency in the parameters of the member functions of 
KMessageBox doesn't make any sense to me.

Regards,
Ingo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9oGlUGnR+RTDgudgRAvc0AJ9spYwmyg7ZZqQM3HZ4f+Yoda//5QCfVj8A
n5Xhbk/YydZwX1XS/zdA0g8=
=ND40
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----