Re: KMail: Message list aggregation - how does it work?

On Freitag, 15. März 2019 10:37:34 CET David Hurka wrote:
> I am using KMail for about a year now, and it helps me a lot. But now I want
> to give some user feedback on the “aggregation” feature of the message
> list. In short: It is complicated.

Yes, it is.


> It seems to be possible to group by date, thread, and sender/receiver; on
> two different levels. Great so far, but it is difficult to learn how to
> control the behaviour. The Aggregation menu provides 7 presets, but which
> one should one use?

My suggestion would be to try them all, discard the ones you don't like at 
all, try the others for a few days and then choose your favorite. I guess 
that's what you did already. :-)

> - There is no tooltip in the menu explaining the design/purpose.
>   (Are tooltips in menus possible?)

I don't think that tooltips in menus are possible. If you open the 
configuration dialog, then each preset is described with a short (maybe too 
short?) text.

> - There are basically 5 settings (seen in “Customize Message Aggregation
>   Modes”), but the available presets probably change several of them at a
>   time, so trying different presets doesn’t explain how it works. If one has
> only few emails, no difference is visible at all.

Well, one can always change the settings after one has received more emails. 
As long as the value of a setting doesn't make a difference it doesn't matter. 
At least, that's how I think about this.

> - The names of the presets are not really explanatory about the differences.
> (“Activity by Date, Flat” <-> “Flat Date View”,
>   “Activity by Date” <-> “Current Activity”)
>   I would expect presets to be named just by their purpose.
>   (like “Standard Mailing List”)

I think the problem is that apart from the "Standard Mailing List" preset none 
of the other presets does have a clear purpose. I very much think it's just a 
matter of personal preferences and "aggregations" people know from other (web) 
email clients. If you can think of better names of the presets then we'd be 
happy to hear them.

> Currently I’m missing a reason to hide settings behind presets. But maybe
> the obstacle is just in my way of thinking. Can you explain the idea behind
> the aggregation presets? Thank in advance.

The reason is simple and you have given it in your first paragraph: "It is 
complicated."

The presets give people a short list of options to choose from without 
confronting them with the detailed settings. And those people who are not 
happy with any of the presets can delve into the complicated configuration 
dialog and tweak the presets to their liking.

Regards,
Ingo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EABECAB0WIQRxKgkQMhrHYtSAVAgadH5FMOC52AUCXIu7xgAKCRAadH5FMOC5
2MVjAKDazb60LqYiFKVyh1trjldiWk3sIQCfbwY8KVbuYMDaWYCXcu1D7pQMfd8=
=Wh+u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----