bug#68369: closed ([BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting from message #22)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:31:36 +0200
with message-id <8334uvb19z.fsf@gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#68369: [BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting 
from message #22
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #68369,
regarding [BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting from message #22
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
68369: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=68369
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> [BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting from message #22
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 10 Jan 2024 13:01:32 +0000
>
>
>
>
> A. Open any Rmail mailbox with at least 22 messages. Suppose for 
> simplicity that this Rmail mailbox is connected via imap to a remote 
> mailbox which won't receive any new message for the duration of our 
> experiment.
> B. Place yourself over any message from 1 to 21: the echo area says 
> nothing. Now press the key "g" to update your mailbox, the echo area 
> displays "0 new messages read"
> C. Place yourself over message number 22 or higher (say we choose number 
> 22): the echo area now says "Showing message 22...done"!! Now press the 
> key "g" to update your mailbox, the echo area now displays "Showing 
> message 22...done"!!
>
> What is going on from message #22?
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#68369: [BUG] Unexpected behaviour with Rmail starting from message #22
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:31:36 +0200
>
>
>
>
> > From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> > Cc: rameiko87@posteo.net, 68369@debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 22:37:56 -0500
> > 
> >   > > It is not a matter of explanation -- rather, is there a way to
> >   > > modify the feature a tiny bit such that its meaning will be evident.
> > 
> >   > Sorry, I still don't think I follow.  What kind of changes in the
> >   > feature you had in mind that would make its meaning evident?
> > 
> > I don't have any specific ideas for that feature.  I'm suggesting that
> > other people look for interface ideas to make this more self-explanatory.
> > Maybe we will find one.  If not, well will still have the option of
> > trying to explain it better.
> > 
> > If we don't find one, we will still have the option of documenting it
> > better.
>
> Thanks, I made the doc string more clear about the effect of the
> option, and I'm therefore closing this bug.
>
>
> --- End Message ---