Ticket #599 (fixed bug)
Manage subscription lists when merging and splitting threads
- Created: 2012-01-19 21:25:02
- Reported by: karol
- Assigned to: Franz
- Milestone: 1.4.9
- Component: code
- Priority: normal
Splitting: Thread A (subscribed) split into threads A (still subscribed) and B (not subscribed).
Merging: Thread A (not subscribed) and thread B (subscribed) merged into thread A (still not subscribed).
A moderator leaving a message in thread A, saying that some posts have been moved to thread B + a link to thread B is fine, but I still have to remember to go there and subscribe.
I know that some people may not be interested in thread B, but IMHO an opt-out is safer. I think this problem does not exist when merging threads.
I'd prefer not to lose track of the threads I'm supposed to be subscribed to :-)
Can it be done?
Franz 2012-01-19 23:43:58
- Milestone set to 1.4.9.
Franz 2012-04-03 22:38:30
- Component set to code.
- Owner set to Franz.
Franz 2012-04-08 15:50:57
Are you saying it wouldn't make sense to stay subscribed to the merged topic? I would argue it is, or did I misunderstand something here?
karol 2012-04-08 17:27:46
It makes sense to me, but right now you get a 50% chance to be subscribed to the merged thread as only people that were subscribed to thread A are subscribed to the merged thread.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 6#p1043856
I was subscribed to thread B; it got merged with thread A that I was not subscribed to and as a result I'm not subscribed to the merged thread which makes me a sad panda.
Franz 2012-04-08 21:42:15
I think this problem does not exist when merging threads.
This sentence confused me a little. But I think I got it now.
Working on it.
karol 2012-04-08 21:44:28
I meant that when merging threads people want to stay subscribed for sure, while in the event of splitting, some people may not be interested in the other thread.
Sorry for wording it in an awkward way.