(*** This bug was imported into bugs.kde.org ***) Package: kmail Version: 1.4.2 (using KDE 3.0.2 ) Severity: wishlist Installed from: SuSE Compiler: gcc version 2.95.2 19991024 (release) OS: Linux (i686) release 2.2.19 OS/Compiler notes: Hi! IMHO it would be great to have the possibility to save all attachments in ONE step. (now it's necessary to RMB every single attachment. cu ferdinand (Submitted via bugs.kde.org) (Called from KBugReport dialog)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 11 July 2002 17:30 gassauer@kde.org wrote: > IMHO it would be great to have the possibility to save all > attachments in ONE step. (now it's necessary to RMB every single Isn't this a duplicate wish? I'm pretty sure it is. Anyway if we allowed multiple selections in the mime tree viewer then the user could save multiple attachments in one step. Regards Ingo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9LfcKGnR+RTDgudgRAqykAJ9N4sRDIZK4fTRlY0e2paHGJfhxhwCdGTFR rCnGHT+m3MWmF1KThW59VOQ= =pP7N -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 11 July 2002 23:22 Ingo Kl=F6cker wrote: > On Thursday 11 July 2002 17:30 gassauer@kde.org wrote: > > IMHO it would be great to have the possibility to save all > > attachments in ONE step. (now it's necessary to RMB every single > > Isn't this a duplicate wish? I'm pretty sure it is. > > Anyway if we allowed multiple selections in the mime tree viewer > then the user could save multiple attachments in one step. <snip> May I direct everyone's look to the problem that we would then run into?=20 Namely "trusting" the sender to not use malicious filename parameters?=20 And violating best practice principles in attachment handling in that=20 we don't ask the user for confirmation of a filename for the saved=20 attachment? Or should we present a dialog with a isRenamingEnabled() QListView that=20 holds the to-be-used filenames? Marc - --=20 Marc Mutz <mutz@kde.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9LoEU3oWD+L2/6DgRAtBlAKD06vklSZStSu5TXbRPzM3kGFTIRACgjd2o jw4JfDGjt3lvlR8QASd8BzA=3D =3DU/73 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 12 July 2002 09:11 Marc Mutz wrote: > On Thursday 11 July 2002 23:22 Ingo Klöcker wrote: > > On Thursday 11 July 2002 17:30 gassauer@kde.org wrote: > > > IMHO it would be great to have the possibility to save all > > > attachments in ONE step. (now it's necessary to RMB every single > > > > Isn't this a duplicate wish? I'm pretty sure it is. > > > > Anyway if we allowed multiple selections in the mime tree viewer > > then the user could save multiple attachments in one step. > > <snip> > > May I direct everyone's look to the problem that we would then run > into? Namely "trusting" the sender to not use malicious filename > parameters? And violating best practice principles in attachment > handling in that we don't ask the user for confirmation of a filename > for the saved attachment? Huh? This must be a misunderstanding. I never proposed that we should simply save the attachments without asking the user for a filename. But then again I probably misunderstood Ferdinand's wish because he most likely only want's one file dialog where he selects the directory where all attachments should be saved and not one file dialog for each attachment. > Or should we present a dialog with a isRenamingEnabled() QListView > that holds the to-be-used filenames? This sounds like a good compromise. It should be shown after the user has selected the target directory. Regards Ingo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9LyE8GnR+RTDgudgRAk3KAKDL6PIVoWds4h7s52HF2wvokwcwOQCgvoU4 kQBQ/FRBD40WdEelSdGKbhY= =dHtC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Aparently my suggestion I was not clear. IMHO a RMB menu "Save all attachments" should automaticaly select all=20 attachments (like "select all" in konqueror) and save all together to one o= r=20 individualy to different destinations. IMHO thats what you can do with konqueror too - select files from ftp and= =20 save them automaticaly. basicaly same risk potential? And if someone wants to save all attachments he/she will de it anyhow. I just got 10 documents and the other day 20 images- it's boring to save th= em=20 all one by one. - --=20 cu ferdinand http://www.goesing.at -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9L0RQWjd2zH2e+LERAgXMAKCxI/E468xPn9xB3Y7aetHR4kF5+QCcCKbT Naq+hEMGks79HBjN3fF3rcY=3D =3DS6/X -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 12 July 2002 23:04 Ferdinand Gassauer wrote: > Aparently my suggestion I was not clear. > > IMHO a RMB menu "Save all attachments" should automaticaly select all > attachments (like "select all" in konqueror) and save all together to > one or individualy to different destinations. <snip> I understood so much. it's still a dup. Might I request from you a suggestion about how this should be=20 implemented GUI-wise? Esp. the "or individually to different=20 destinations" sounds just like as much efford (for the user) as now. Marc - --=20 Marc Mutz <mutz@kde.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9L/+g3oWD+L2/6DgRAt+TAKDzQ0oaLAnhEvPNjThDbrgHIy+k0wCfa4EE Ma0krjxoNN0A1qm1XvUwUzI=3D =3D0BvE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Saturday 13 July 2002 12:23 Marc Mutz wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Friday 12 July 2002 23:04 Ferdinand Gassauer wrote: > > Aparently my suggestion I was not clear. > > > > IMHO a RMB menu "Save all attachments" should automaticaly select all > > attachments (like "select all" in konqueror) and save all together to > > one or individualy to different destinations. > > <snip> > > I understood so much. it's still a dup. > Might I request from you a suggestion about how this should be > implemented GUI-wise? Esp. the "or individually to different > destinations" sounds just like as much efford (for the user) as now. The problem I see is to keep trac of the already saved or not saved attachments. So I think the suggested solution " Or should we present a dialog with a isRenamingEnabled() QListView that holds the to-be-used filenames?" is pretty much what I think is needed. eventualy this list should provide - a preview function - the possibility to select/specify a different directory for each file. - to exclude the file from saving - indicating a naming conflict as mentioned above. - renaming (as some filenames are realy not what I want) > > Marc > > - -- > Marc Mutz <mutz@kde.org> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQE9L/+g3oWD+L2/6DgRAt+TAKDzQ0oaLAnhEvPNjThDbrgHIy+k0wCfa4EE > Ma0krjxoNN0A1qm1XvUwUzI= > =0BvE > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > (Complete bug history is available at http://bugs.kde.org/db/45/45023.html) -- cu ferdinand on SuSE 7.0 KDE 3.0 BRANCH
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 28 July 2002 11:58 Ferdinand Gassauer wrote: <snip> > > Might I request from you a suggestion about how this should be > > implemented GUI-wise? Esp. the "or individually to different > > destinations" sounds just like as much efford (for the user) as > > now. > > The problem I see is to keep trac of the already saved or not saved > attachments. > So I think the suggested solution > " Or should we present a dialog with a isRenamingEnabled() QListView > that holds the to-be-used filenames?" > is pretty much what I think is needed. > eventualy this list should provide > - a preview function > - the possibility to select/specify a different directory for each > file. - to exclude the file from saving > - indicating a naming conflict as mentioned above. > - renaming (as some filenames are realy not what I want) <snip> Sounds like a job for kio? -> reassigning to kfile. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9Q+ZF3oWD+L2/6DgRAtegAJ46Ig7ElG9HJi/44uLPq7TG5GeWbwCg0kYl LMFWWwxwDHhICr3JLguS8zg=3D =3DsvCn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
No, this is really something very specific. You might implement that functionality in kmail.
IMHO the wish could be closed. Although the renaming issue remains valid. It's fabulous, which file names are used - for day to day work renaming is mandatory. The best solution would be a preview of the attachments with renaming possiblility
Adjusting the summary.
*** Bug 122976 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Created attachment 38145 [details] screenshot of the "Save all" feature in Evolution I just run into the same problem as the original author of this issue more than seven years ago: I received an email with several dozen pictures attached. Trying to save them was a very tedious task with KMail. I would really like to see the "Save all" feature I got to know and love in Evolution (see attached screenshot) to be implemented in KMail.
Oh ... my ... I just noticed that there is a "Save Attachments..." menu entry in the rmb context menu that only appears when you are *NOT* clicking on any attachment. What kind of genius GUI usability designer was working on that feature?! You should either implement the "Save All" button as shown in Evolution or add a "Save All Attachments..." menu entry in the context menu when rmb-clicking on an attachment.
To keep the issues separated I added a feature request in Bug#213749.
Thank you for your feature request. Kmail1 is currently unmaintained so we are closing all wishes. Please feel free to reopen a feature request for Kmail2 if it has not already been implemented. Thank you for your understanding.
Instead of creating a new feature request, please confirm here if the wishlist is still valid for kmail2.