[sylpheed:36257] 'unifying' open and close commands e-mail in Sylpheed

[Ernst van der Storm]

Dear Hiroyuki Yamamoto e.a.,

I would like to do a suggestion for improving Sylpheed.

First the reason for this: until half a year ago I used Outlook2007 for emailing, as well for my work as privately.
Now I am working mainly on Ubuntu, so I switched to Sylpheed (Version 3.4.1 (Build 1156)) and I am satisfied with the features and performance.
There is one item where I would like your attention about: the many (different) ways one can open and close the emails. In outlook every email can be opened with <enter> on the keyboard, and closed with <escape>.
In Sylpheed there are many ways:

* <enter> but cannot close with escape (inbox)
* control+alt+n can be closed with <escape> 
* double click, close with <escape>
* open with right menu is o.k., closing not with escape

* in concepts: double click, cannot be closed with escape! (alt+w does not work, alt+b,s or alt+F4 or x in the right top corner; all working with an ev. question to save or not)
* in concepts: <enter> is open, closing -- no menu available -- with alt+F4 or mouse x right top corner; one cannot edit; (with space I get a warning about no more..?)
* in concepts: control+alt+n can be closed with <escape> but I cannot edit the concept although there are two sub menu items with "bewerken" (=edit) on it(!)

* in send items: double click can edit, and resend it (no force to forward the email) closing not with escape
* in send items: control+alt+n open, closing with <escape> edit possible, resending see previous line
* in send items: <enter> opens as in concepts, closing idem
* in send items: opening with right menu is o.k., closing not with escape
(b.t.w. in send items, resend possible while it's already send!?! that send button shouldn't be there!)

You will agree that there is little uniformity in these methods (and that makes me sometimes long back to Outlook ;-).
Is it not possible to do all these open and close commands with <enter> and <escape> respectively (in some folders completed with a question to save of course)?

The open structure of the database is fine, making a selective backup easy, but all those different ways to open and close do diminish my enthusiasm.

I hope you will consider to implement these suggestions in a next update. (I have more suggestions but this is enough for the moment.)

Thank you for your attention and effort, 	Ernst van der Storm, The Netherlands