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 219038 - ability to expand/collapse several marked threads
ability to expand/collapse several marked threads
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
2.6.x (obsolete)
Other All
: Normal enhancement
: Future
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on: 218570
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-01-22 09:56 UTC by Andrew Hatfield
Modified: 2009-09-18 12:39 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: Unversioned Enhancement


Description Andrew Hatfield 2002-01-22 09:45:48 UTC 
Package: Evolution
Priority: Normal
Version: 1.0.1
Synopsis: [FEATURE REQUEST] Thread View (part 1)
Bugzilla-Product: Evolution
Bugzilla-Component: Shell

Description:
To be able to collapse all / expand all items in a threaded discussion



Unknown reporter: andrew.hatfield@secureone.com.au, changed to bugbuddy-import@ximian.com.
Comment 1 israel 2002-01-22 21:49:30 UTC 
Sorry, but i don't understand, what do you mean?

Ctrl+T show or hide threads, that's what you are saying.?
Comment 2 Andrew Hatfield 2002-01-23 01:17:14 UTC 
not just display the threads.  but to be able to collapse and expand 
them via a menu option and keyboard shortcut.

for example, you can collapse and expand an individual thread 
with '+' and '-', but you can't do a group.

ie, CTRL+A to select all, but if you do a '+' or '-' it only acts 
upon the current thread, not the selection
Comment 3 israel 2002-01-23 20:32:40 UTC 
now i understand you,i think this looks like a feature :)
Comment 4 Andrew Hatfield 2002-01-23 23:37:41 UTC 
yes, i did mention that in the subject :)
[FEATURE REQUEST]

thought i'd make it easy :)
Comment 5 André Klapper 2005-02-09 17:24:24 UTC 
depends on 18570; changing subject to a more explicit one
Comment 6 Matthew Barnes 2008-03-11 00:28:27 UTC 
Bumping version to a stable release.
Comment 7 Tobias Mueller 2009-09-18 12:39:00 UTC 
This actually works nowadays. If not, please file a new bug :-)