Comment 3 for bug 709214

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:44 PM, mere user <email address hidden>wrote:

> Public bug reported:
>
> hi, not really bugs, but two minor issues:
>
> 1) coloring of summary buffer using u-vm-color is strange now, see
> attached tiff file
>
> OK, had a quick look into this. Not sure now that it was my fault! What I
> think is happening is that you are getting weird interactions between
> vm-summary-faces.el and u-vm-color.el. However, I'm surprised this has
> happened after the merging in of my changes to custom as I've not modified
> either the definitions for these faces or the u-vm-color.el faces (I did
> change the custom group, but that should not affect anything other than how
> things are displayed/grouped when running customize). Had it been a while
> since your last updated? Just wondering if this could be something from the
> updates done to vm-summary-faces.el, which was done back in August last
> year.

The u-vm-color.el package is an add-on and not currently supported. However,
I think that now Uday has incorporated the vm-summary-faces.el into VM core,
we probably should modify u-vm-color.el so that it only adds fontification
to the message buffer and not the summary buffer to avoid weird conflicts.
According to a message I saw in u-vm-color, you cannot turn off summary
fontification done by that package to the summary buffer - its all or
nothing. This could be a problem for those who want message buffer
fontification and use u-vm-colour for that. Even just adding the ability to
turn it off and turning it off by default may be sufficient as a quick fix.
I will put it on the list of things to look at.

In the meantime, you can probably improve the look of your faces by tweaking
the definitions for the u-vm-color faces (and maybe the vm-summary-faces). I
noticed that some of the u-vm-color faces appear to have hard wired values
and also noticed a function to copy definitions from the gnus faces, which I
think is the wrong way to handle such things (better to use the :inherit
option).

I realise having to do this sort of tweaking is less than optimal, but until
we have time/resources to address issues in the add-on packages, it is the
only option. We need to focus on fixing things in the main core and getting
8.2.0 out for now.

If you do find alternative settings which seem to work/behave better, let us
know. Maybe we can update the u-vm-faces.el defaults to work better with
vm-summary-faces.el.

Tim