redo doesn't work for deleting/moving mails - is challenging when imap IDLE isn't used or "always check this folder for new messages" is not enabled
Categories
(MailNews Core :: Networking: IMAP, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
People
(Reporter: felix.bau, Unassigned)
References
Details
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0
Steps to reproduce:
I moved/deleted a mail.
I pressed STRG+Z/clicked undo. (and reloaded the folder due to: Bug 1572566 )
I pressed STRG+Y/clicked redo.
Actual results:
The mail stays in the old folder.
Redo does nothing
Expected results:
Redo should've moved the mail to the new folder.
Comment 1•6 years ago
|
||
Are you moving between IMAP or local folders?
Comment 2•6 years ago
|
||
I tried between local folders, Delete, undo, redo. Works.
Comment 3•6 years ago
|
||
I'm seeing a delay on 69.0b2 using IMAP and moving a message using undo and redo. However, it is working.
Djfe,
Once you undo or redo the move see if you can force a refresh by clicking on one of your other folders and then back to the original. The delay is most likely caused by the round trip between your server and TB and I do agree the delay gives the appearance of not working.
Let me know if forcing a folder refresh works for you and we can move forward.
Comment 5•6 years ago
|
||
For me this works perfectly between local folders. But not so great with imap. The undo works but the redo (after an undo) doesn't seem to do anything. Not sure if not having offline store matters, but I don't.
I guess the undo feature is useful since you might move messages and accidentally pick the wrong folder and not sure which one and decide you want them back. With undo the action should just be reversed and the lost messages are restored. However, redo seems a bit less useful; why not just do what you did again?
Anyhow, looking at the imap log, redo is not doing what it should. It tries to remove the \deleted from from the UID of the original moved message in the source folder. However, that UID is no longer valid since the restored with undo message now has a higher UID. Also, I don't see an attempt to move or copy the restored message back to the destination or remove the \deleted flag from it on redo.
I need to look closer at this since server support for MOVE and UIDPLUS may be affecting this and causing variation of the reaction to undo/redo depending on server.
Comment 6•6 years ago
|
||
Thanks, Gene.
@Jork K you're right it happens on IMAP only, I forgot to test that.
@Benjamin Flanagin it's a delay, you're right.
Exactly 10 seconds for me when doing undo.
Redo doesn't do anything.
"see if you can force a refresh by clicking on one of your other folders and then back to the original"
that's actually what I meant by "and reloaded the folder due to" ^^
Either a folder refresh or waiting for 10 seconds works. Pressing F5 also works.
@gene smith
thanks a lot for taking a closer look :)
I just tested offline store. (my inbox already has it activated, so I only had to activate it for my trash)
It didn't change the outcome sadly. Still exactly 10 seconds of delay.
While redo seems useless, it should do atleast the same as for pop3/local folders imo. everything else is just confusing.
While we are it, I also tested copying messages to other folders on IMAP and POP3:
On POP3/locally undo works fine and instantly, on IMAP it doesn't work at all. You have to delete the new mail manually.
I didn't test redo for that since it's already broken for moving.
It's probably easier for you to figure whether it works correctly if you take a look at the logs anyway.
What I noticed: all actions work instantaneously if one of the folders is a local folder. And redo isn't broken.
The overall issue I'm facing here is that I as a user wouldn't wait for 10 seconds.
after ~2 seconds I started to move to the trash and searched there but couldn't find the mail.
I almost thought it got lost. Then I returned to the actual folder and it was back again.
If you accidentally delete the wrong mail and your trash is full and you don't remember the subject of your mail, then figuring out whether you managed to restore the correct mail can be very frustrating if you don't see the mailing list change for over 2 seconds of delay. I would look for a visual change after undo. Noticing where a restored mail is placed inside a list is easy. Especially if it's placed there in an instant and if you still know at which position it was before you deleted it.
something else I just noticed about undo/redo which seems odd to me:
undo/redo doesn't work for marking messages as read/unread and it also doesn't work for tags.
Once you start marking/tagging loads of messages at once: for example with the function "mark messages from date till date as read", then undo/redo actually starts making a whole lot of sense.
I don't want this bug report to actually implement this as a feature and I know Thunderbird isn't actively being worked on.
Just: What are your thoughts on the idea? I might open a new ticket for this with the type set to enhancement.
Comment 8•6 years ago
|
||
Note also that undo may not appear to work if your server doesn't support IDLE (e.g., my isp's server, charter) . The moved message is actually returned to the source folder on undo but, if the folder is not IDLE the now new message is not detected. To see the restored message in the source folder you may have to
- Select another folder and then move back to the source folder. The restored message should then appear. Or,
- In folder properties, set so the folder is checked when new mail is checked. The restored message should then appear when you click "get new mail" button. Note: If source folder is Inbox, it is always checked when "get new mail" is clicked.
Looking at the imap log on an account that supports IDLE, the undo seems a bit slow. It takes about 6 seconds before the imap MOVE from destination folder back to the source folder kicks off and then it takes about another 4 seconds for the server to report the "new" message back into the source folder.
Bug 1241524 also has requested that the undo process be sped up by not relying on network activities completely and just do file/memory copies and then let the network catch up somehow. But I haven't had a lot of interest in figuring out to do this. (It would definitely require that the source and destination folder have offline storage.)
Comment 10•6 years ago
•
|
||
(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #9)
This problem would also exist in version 60, correct?
I think so. I don't think undo/redo has been touched, at least since I have been working on tb that last couple years.
Updated•6 years ago
|
Comment 12•6 years ago
|
||
do we need any additional info?
Comment 13•5 years ago
•
|
||
Hi,
FYI, I have observed such behaviour in Thunderbird 77.0b2 (32-bit) and previous version on Window 10 1909.
For example, if I delete a message in my Inbox (IMAP/SMTP), message is immediately deleted (moved to Trash)...it disappears instantly from the Inbox message list... but if I press CTRL+Z to undo... it does not immediately/instantly re-appears back in the Inbox message list...
I either have to:
- press F5 to refresh the Inbox view
- click on another folder and click back on Inbox folder (so view is refreshed)
- or wait for a very long time after which the email undeleted may suddenly re-appear in the Inbox message list after a while...
It would be great if that could be fixed for the next stable version... not a big issue but a bit annoying... especially for those who may not be aware... it feels simply as if CTRL+Z does not work as expected... while it does... possibly causing end-user undo again which would undo the action before last... and so on... if you keep pressing CTRL+Z...
It seems to be a view refresh issue... it may just need to be triggered just after the undo action is completed... was working before (sometime ago not sure exactly when)... but "broke" at some point and was never really fixed :-)
It is not only affecting delete/undelete of messages but any undo actions... e.g moving an email in subfolder and undo it (CTRL+Z) would have the similar effect.
Hope that help.
Regards,
Updated•5 years ago
|
Updated•3 years ago
|
Description
•