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 622423 - Inconsistent behavior of Previous/Next buttons in the main window and the message window
Inconsistent behavior of Previous/Next buttons in the main window and the mes...
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 619387
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
2.30.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2010-06-22 18:13 UTC by Giacomo Perale
Modified: 2010-11-26 10:01 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Giacomo Perale 2010-06-22 18:13:17 UTC
Continuing from closed bug 616724, the behavior of the Previous/Next buttons in the separated message window (double-click on a message) is not consistent with the same buttons in the main window of Evolution.

In the main window the Previous/Next buttons respectively move up and down in the message list no matter its order.

In the message window they always go respectively to the older/newer message in chronological order.

This differs from evolution pre-2.30 behavior and is inconsistent: for example, if you order the messages by date with the most recent message on top the Next/Previous buttons in the main window go respectively to the newer/older message, but in the separated window they go respectively to the older/newer message. If the message list in the main window is ordered by author, or subject there's now way to predict what message will be selected.

The separated mail window's message list should inherit all the properties of the main window's message list.

I didn't use a release of evolution including the patch committed when closing bug 616724, but both the code and the description make me doubt that it addresses this bug as well. In case it does, sorry for the noise.
Comment 1 Milan Crha 2010-11-26 10:01:20 UTC
Thanks for the bug report. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but please feel free to report any further bugs you find.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 619387 ***