After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 205927 - support deletion of attachments
support deletion of attachments
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
unspecified
Other All
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
evolution[attachments]
: 207980 212778 213423 242601 247089 255557 260164 269126 331125 335870 337323 364440 382973 436969 496098 507648 510585 522989 574185 617187 631884 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 233852
 
 
Reported: 2001-07-31 20:17 UTC by Dan Berger
Modified: 2013-07-24 14:39 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Dan Berger 2001-07-31 20:17:57 UTC
The following thread occured on the evo mailing list:

> Eudora (on the Mac anyway) has a feature I like where attachments are
> downloaded into a designated folder. The message then just keeps a
> reference to that file instead of keeping the whole attachment embedded
> within the mail. The inbox then does not grow to astronomical sizes. My
> Evolution inbox currently is about 80MB, largely due to attachments. I
> guess most of it is my fault for not having saved attachments and
> deleting the mail, but in many cases I want to keep the mail around for
> future reference.
> 
> Is something like that possible in Evolution? I guess what I am asking
> for is an option to automatically save my attachmetns to disk and then
> cutting it out of the email. Or does this go against all RFCs?
> 
> Thanks,

Mutt actually has a feature which I find terribly useful.  On non
PGP-signed messages, you can delete individual MIME parts.  This allows,
for example, you to save the message attachement to disk, and delete the
attachment from the message.

It keeps track of when the part was deleted and shows you (for example):

[-- attachment#39875 [details] --]
[-- Type: message/external-body, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.2K --]
[-- This application/x-rpm attachment (size 2.2M bytes) has been deleted --]
[-- on Mon, 30 Jul 2001 21:40:51 -0700 --]

I use this feature in mutt quite frequently, and it would be nice if
Evolution supported something similar (optimally recording the deletion
date in a "mutt-compatible" way).
Comment 1 Eric Lambart 2001-09-13 06:19:39 UTC
*** bug 207980 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Dan Winship 2001-10-24 21:14:44 UTC
*** bug 212778 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Dan Winship 2001-10-24 21:15:50 UTC
*** bug 213423 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Steve Murphy 2002-02-05 16:53:57 UTC
In regards to "duplicate" bug 213423, let me add that, as submitter of
13423, that when I submitted it, I did not previously know of the
existence of this bug (5927), neither am I familiar with the neat
features described in mutt/ mac eudora. And, in this light, I find it
even more remarkable how unified my enhancement request is with that
of 5927. I see it as an "omen". You've just got to move this
enhancement request way high up in priority now! ;^)

murf
Comment 5 James Kenworthy 2002-07-10 12:09:34 UTC
I concur that having the ability to delete an attachment from a mail
message after saving the attachment, would make evolution a much more
robust product.
Comment 6 Gerardo Marin 2003-05-09 03:57:45 UTC
*** bug 242601 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 7 Gerardo Marin 2004-03-14 06:20:04 UTC
*** bug 255557 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 8 Gerardo Marin 2004-06-15 00:12:29 UTC
*** bug 260164 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 9 André Klapper 2004-09-06 11:48:29 UTC
*** bug 247089 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 10 Gerardo Marin 2004-11-05 18:49:19 UTC
*** bug 269126 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 11 André Klapper 2006-02-14 22:25:21 UTC
*** Bug 331125 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 12 Karsten Bräckelmann 2006-03-24 20:26:45 UTC
*** Bug 335870 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 13 Karsten Bräckelmann 2006-04-05 13:31:38 UTC
*** Bug 337323 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 14 jlohikos 2006-04-05 14:25:52 UTC
------- Comment #1 from Karsten Bräckelmann  2006-04-05 13:31 UTC -------
"Deleting attachments of received emails alters the document/message, and
therefore is not the sent document any longer. This violates the respecive RFC
(standard). This has been discussed pretty often, and there are a couple of
different reasons, why this should not be supported. Sorry.

(Supporting this for the users own sent mails is not an option UI wise, and
alters the saved document as well.)"

Well the RFC should be revised then.

This feature would be just really usefull and that's why some other emailers have it, like mutt. As the user him/herself has to manually remove the attachments, would think (s)he knows what (s)he is doing. The application (Evolution) could mark the message as mutt does, also semantically know later that the message cannot be bounced/forwarded in a normal way, like not without a  warning.

I thought computers and programs are made for people, and not people made for programs and RFCs. Generally ofcourse I agree RFCs are a Good Thing (tm).


Comment 15 Dan Berger 2006-04-05 14:56:08 UTC
(In reply to comment #14)
> ------- Comment #1 from Karsten Bräckelmann  2006-04-05 13:31 UTC -------
> This feature would be just really usefull and that's why some other emailers
> have it, like mutt. As the user him/herself has to manually remove the

For what it's worth - "even" Firefox supports attachment deletion.  

Comment 16 Dan Berger 2006-04-05 14:56:56 UTC
(In reply to comment #15)
> (In reply to comment #14)
> > ------- Comment #1 from Karsten Bräckelmann  2006-04-05 13:31 UTC -------
> > This feature would be just really usefull and that's why some other emailers
> > have it, like mutt. As the user him/herself has to manually remove the
> 
> For what it's worth - "even" Firefox supports attachment deletion.  
> 

s/Firefox/Thunderbird/
Comment 17 Karsten Bräckelmann 2006-10-24 00:28:57 UTC
*** Bug 364440 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 18 André Klapper 2006-12-07 21:34:54 UTC
*** Bug 382973 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 19 Steve Clark 2007-03-15 16:01:39 UTC
Oddly, the developers have no problem removing attachments from replies, even though this also "alters the message".  This looks like a good project for a plugin, similar to add-on products that do this for Exchange, Lotus Notes, etc.  Requirements would be:

- adds "Delete Attachment" button to Attachment Context Menu
- replaces long attachment with short message "Attachment Deleted"
- doesn't break message threading, replies, etc.
- updates indices so that space can be reclaimed. Simplest way might be to delete the old message and add the new shorter one.

Comment 20 Jeffrey Stedfast 2007-03-16 02:35:45 UTC
it has to be implemented as a "delete attachment", "re-append message", "delete original message" sequence because none of the mail-stores support modifying messages in-line.

(I suppose you could hack it with Maildir but I'd suggest against it)
Comment 21 Steve Clark 2007-03-16 15:17:06 UTC
Thanks Jeffrey, I'm looking at the plugin developer guide and would appreciate any suggestions.

Also, does anyone feel strongly about being able to delete inline content?  Ie. - any sections of a message that has a handler which displays it inline.  These are treated differently then attachments which are sections having unknown (or at least undisplayable) content.
Comment 22 André Klapper 2007-05-10 01:25:24 UTC
*** Bug 436969 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 23 Sebastien Bacher 2007-07-26 21:51:31 UTC
the ubuntu bug tracker has a similar request on https://bugs.launchpad.net/evolution/+bug/127026
Comment 24 André Klapper 2007-11-12 12:44:35 UTC
*** Bug 496098 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 25 André Klapper 2008-01-06 14:24:32 UTC
*** Bug 507648 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 26 sam tygier 2008-01-06 14:41:43 UTC
Disappointing to see this set to WONTFIX, which RFC is the problem here?

Maybe the the RFC should be updated if so many other clients allow this.
Comment 27 André Klapper 2008-01-19 12:37:27 UTC
*** Bug 510585 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 28 Matthew Barnes 2008-03-18 01:03:36 UTC
*** Bug 522989 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 29 Matthew Barnes 2008-03-19 18:42:34 UTC
Reopening at user's request.

I'd like to at least re-examine this issue for myself.
Comment 30 Frederik Elwert 2008-03-20 09:52:46 UTC
I was among those requesting the reopening.

I think that this is a quite crucial feature which is supported by a couple of mailing programs and I'd welcome if Evolution would support it, too.

For me, the most urgent need for this is with IMAP mailboxes. Those usually have far stricter size constraints as a local hard drive. And it is the idea of IMAP to have one central place for your mail that you can access from various places.

So when receiving a message with a huge attachment in my IMAP inbox, I currently have to save the attachment locally and then delete the whole message to prevent my inbox from reaching the quota constraints. But I then loose the information that I received this particular message from my inbox.

Instead, I'd want to just save the attachment locally and delete it from the message, leaving a notices that there was an attachment with name xy. I then can keep all my messages in place, and still save space.
Comment 31 Eckhard M. Jäger 2008-05-21 19:13:26 UTC
Hello,
this feature is requested by many people. I started writing a Evolution feature proposal and made a mockup of it:
http://www.neeneenee.de/evo/#3
Comment 32 michele 2008-07-10 12:27:13 UTC
this guy has written a plugin and packaged for debian.

http://people.debian.org.tw/~chihchun/2008/05/23/remove-attachments-evolution-plugin-002/

I tested it in Ubuntu Hardy, and works nicely. 
Maybe Evolution developers could pick it up, and package it into vanilla evolution, maybe leaving it disabled by default if they feel that enabling it is tainting their standard-compliance.

cheers
Comment 33 Ben Morgan 2008-10-24 09:32:42 UTC
Wow, look at all the duplicate bug requests. (Doesn't that say *anything*?) It would be very nice should this get implemented/included in the vanilla evolution. Have been very much wanting it as well...

thanks
Comment 34 Matthew Barnes 2009-03-27 01:09:51 UTC
*** Bug 574185 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 35 nomnex 2010-02-21 02:44:52 UTC
Hi, I have followed/commented on several threads about the topic on Ubuntu forum (I am on Ubuntu Linux), Launchpad and bugzilla, and on the Rex Tsai's page [1](he is the author of a plug-in, to compile on Ubuntu)

As expressed by Ben Morgan (comment 33#) I hope to see the feature implemented in the vanilla evolution.

thanks

[1] http://people.debian.org.tw/~chihchun/2008/05/23/remove-attachments-evolution-plugin-002/comment-page-1/#comment-208190
Comment 36 André Klapper 2010-04-29 21:57:18 UTC
*** Bug 617187 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 37 tortugo 2010-04-30 08:22:10 UTC
Wow!

Since 2001, and not solved yet!!!
Comment 38 Jouni.Lohikoski 2010-04-30 10:12:14 UTC
I guess everyone switched to Thunderbird and never came back.
Comment 39 Rex Tsai 2010-10-05 04:22:30 UTC
Hi, I have posted a update in #534453 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=534453
Comment 40 Matthew Barnes 2010-10-11 14:48:34 UTC
*** Bug 631884 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 41 Ruchir Brahmbhatt 2010-10-12 05:56:07 UTC
It'll be very good if code in #534453 can be implemented in evo.
Comment 42 Rex Tsai 2010-10-12 06:35:51 UTC
I did not finger out how to implement it as core function.

But I think it's quite easy to have it as a plugin in evolution/plugins/remove-attachments, if you want I can submit a patch based on 2.6.32.
Comment 43 Rex Tsai 2010-10-12 06:37:20 UTC
> evolution/plugins/remove-attachments, if you want I can submit a patch based on
> 2.6.32.

I meant Ev 2.30. :p
Comment 44 Ruchir Brahmbhatt 2010-10-12 07:26:07 UTC
I mean if at least it can be included in default plugins so it can be available to users across different ditros.
Comment 45 WMS 2010-10-28 23:21:31 UTC
+1

Link to package for Ubuntu:
 https://launchpad.net/~chihchun/+archive/ppa/+packages

Comment 27 describes how to rebuild:
 http://people.debian.org.tw/~chihchun/2008/05/23/remove-attachments-evolution-plugin-002/

As a general perspective, there are not a lot of usability enhancements required for Evolution to keep up with modern expectations (as good as Outlook and Thunderbird).  I count four key ones:

1. This one

2. The requirement to be able to change font on sent emails (several bugs record this one), 

3. Expansion of the address pane when adding users to meetings so you can see the whole address instead of having to widen the window manually every time

4. Ability to create a new email with <ctrl>-n from an existing received email being read (for some reason requires the non-intuitive and non-standard <ctrl>-shift-m) and from a new email in progress (which can't be done at all)

As an observation based purely on my own experience, there is switching to Thunderbird / Lightening happening because some think non-prioritization of features like these to indicate that Evolution is a dead application, which of course is not true.  I think Evo beats the pants of both Outlook and Thunderbird/Lightening in most areas, which is why I've made these comments to try and help focus some priority, but agree these four features are quite important to many users, and the lack of them leaves a disproportionately negative impression. f
Comment 46 Rex Tsai 2010-10-31 15:00:48 UTC
Thanks Milan Crha, my plugin has been integrated into Evolution. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=534453

This issue can be closed. :-)
Comment 47 Matthew Barnes 2010-10-31 15:44:51 UTC
Closing as fixed.