[GH-ISSUE #1082 ] Feature Request: Archived chats #667

Author

Owner

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2026):

I don't understand why are developers ignoring my feature request for more than 1 month. I hope anyone can see that issue

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2026): I don't understand why are developers ignoring my feature request for more than 1 month. I hope anyone can see that issue

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (Mar 1, 2026):

I stumbled upon this old thread and saw it never got a reply.

The problem you described is real. I've felt it too—too many chats, everything jumbled, searching becomes a chore. Pinned chats help a little, but they don't solve the underlying clutter.

One workaround I've been using: periodically export or copy important conversations to my computer and organize them locally. It's not as elegant as a built-in archive, but it keeps the interface clean while preserving what matters.

That said, an archive feature would still be the right long-term solution. Small change, big impact on daily experience.

Hope this helps a bit, even if late.

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (Mar 1, 2026): I stumbled upon this old thread and saw it never got a reply. The problem you described is real. I've felt it too—too many chats, everything jumbled, searching becomes a chore. Pinned chats help a little, but they don't solve the underlying clutter. One workaround I've been using: periodically export or copy important conversations to my computer and organize them locally. It's not as elegant as a built-in archive, but it keeps the interface clean while preserving what matters. That said, an archive feature would still be the right long-term solution. Small change, big impact on daily experience. Hope this helps a bit, even if late.

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Apr 2, 2026):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you believe this issue is still relevant, please leave a comment to keep it open. Thank you for your contributions!

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Apr 2, 2026): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you believe this issue is still relevant, please leave a comment to keep it open. Thank you for your contributions!

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (Apr 2, 2026):

I know that they're ignoring my important issue. Without archived chats, I won't able to archive old chats

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (Apr 2, 2026): I know that they're ignoring my important issue. Without archived chats, I won't able to archive old chats

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-26 21:25:19 +00:00

Author

Owner

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (Apr 2, 2026):

@SuperHero2010 I see this thread — and I hear your frustration.

You opened this issue on January 14. It's been almost three months. The only human reply came from another user (@qingkong66) on March 1. Then the stale bot showed up.

Your request is completely reasonable. Archiving old chats is a basic organization feature. Pinned chats help a little, but they don't solve the clutter problem.

You're not alone on this. A few days ago, another user (@adriangoodrich) opened #1178 with a more detailed proposal — folders, subfolders, search, cross-device sync. Same need, different level of detail. The fact that multiple users are asking for chat organization tells you this isn't a niche request.

About the stale bot — don't worry. The "stale" label just means the bot noticed no recent activity. A single comment (like this one) keeps the issue open. It doesn't mean maintainers have rejected it.

Thanks for raising this. Your issue isn't invisible anymore.

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (Apr 2, 2026): @SuperHero2010 I see this thread — and I hear your frustration. You opened this issue on January 14. It's been almost three months. The only human reply came from another user (@qingkong66) on March 1. Then the stale bot showed up. Your request is completely reasonable. Archiving old chats is a basic organization feature. Pinned chats help a little, but they don't solve the clutter problem. You're not alone on this. A few days ago, another user (@adriangoodrich) opened #1178 with a more detailed proposal — folders, subfolders, search, cross-device sync. Same need, different level of detail. The fact that multiple users are asking for chat organization tells you this isn't a niche request. About the stale bot — don't worry. The "stale" label just means the bot noticed no recent activity. A single comment (like this one) keeps the issue open. It doesn't mean maintainers have rejected it. Thanks for raising this. Your issue isn't invisible anymore.

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (May 5, 2026):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you believe this issue is still relevant, please leave a comment to keep it open. Thank you for your contributions!

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (May 5, 2026): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you believe this issue is still relevant, please leave a comment to keep it open. Thank you for your contributions!

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-26 21:25:19 +00:00

Author

Owner

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026):

Hmm... There's no developer replies me

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026): Hmm... There's no developer replies me

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@nocloudware commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026):

Hi, I'm currently working in a workaround for my issue https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3/issues/1178 but is in an early design mode.

Just yesterday I had the same problem you describe with my 300+ chats 😅.

I believe that an easy fix could be an "Delete all not pinned chats" feature, because, as you describe, archiving them will serve no purpose without a search feature and this would be just a variation of "Delete all chats" + the pinned flag.

Hope this makes sense to the dev team.

🖖🏻

@nocloudware commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026): Hi, I'm currently working in a workaround for my issue https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3/issues/1178 but is in an early design mode. Just yesterday I had the same problem you describe with my 300+ chats 😅. I believe that an easy fix could be an "Delete all not pinned chats" feature, because, as you describe, archiving them will serve no purpose without a search feature and this would be just a variation of "Delete all chats" + the pinned flag. Hope this makes sense to the dev team. 🖖🏻

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026):

Hi, I'm currently working in a workaround for my issue #1178 but is in an early design mode.

Just yesterday I had the same problem you describe with my 300+ chats 😅.

I believe that an easy fix could be an "Delete all not pinned chats" feature, because, as you describe, archiving them will serve no purpose without a search feature and this would be just a variation of "Delete all chats" + the pinned flag.

Hope this makes sense to the dev team.

🖖🏻

😡 Don't you understand? I need an archived chat feature so I DON'T HAVE TO DELETE or PIN them, but I can still UNARCHIVE and CONTINUE the conversation.

That's the basic feature. The "Delete all not pinned chats" feature is USELESS. It can't solve anything.

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026): > Hi, I'm currently working in a workaround for my issue [#1178](https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3/issues/1178) but is in an early design mode. > > Just yesterday I had the same problem you describe with my 300+ chats 😅. > > I believe that an easy fix could be an "Delete all not pinned chats" feature, because, as you describe, archiving them will serve no purpose without a search feature and this would be just a variation of "Delete all chats" + the pinned flag. > > Hope this makes sense to the dev team. > > 🖖🏻 😡 Don't you understand? I need an archived chat feature so I DON'T HAVE TO DELETE or PIN them, but I can still UNARCHIVE and CONTINUE the conversation. That's the basic feature. The "Delete all not pinned chats" feature is USELESS. It can't solve anything.

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@nocloudware commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026):

Yeah, right. Anything else? 🫡

@nocloudware commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026): Yeah, right. Anything else? 🫡

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026):

@SuperHero2010

I read your reply from 5 hours ago — the one with 😡.

You're right. "Delete all not pinned" is not a substitute for archive. Archive means: hide from main list, keep everything, bring it back later, continue the conversation. That's a different feature.

Your request is clear, it's basic, and multiple users have asked for it (#1082, #1178, #1049, #1121, #1293).

I can't build it. I can't make the team reply. But I can tell you: your issue is not invisible, and your description ("don't make me delete, let me unarchive and continue") is the correct one.

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026): > @SuperHero2010 > > I read your reply from 5 hours ago — the one with 😡. > > You're right. "Delete all not pinned" is not a substitute for archive. Archive means: hide from main list, keep everything, bring it back later, continue the conversation. That's a different feature. > > Your request is clear, it's basic, and multiple users have asked for it (#1082, #1178, #1049, #1121, #1293). > > I can't build it. I can't make the team reply. But I can tell you: your issue is not invisible, and your description ("don't make me delete, let me unarchive and continue") is the correct one.

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@nocloudware commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026):

Don't worry my solution will include this feature also.

But as I said, it's in design state.

These are the features I have designed so far:

Search in chats names and chats content.
Hierarchical folder-like organization
Forking
Next:
Archiving

As a one man operation, it could take some time 😅

Best regards

@nocloudware commented on GitHub (May 10, 2026): Don't worry my solution will include this feature also. But as I said, it's in design state. These are the features I have designed so far: - Search in chats names and chats content. - Hierarchical folder-like organization - Forking Next: - Archiving As a one man operation, it could take some time 😅 Best regards

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 13, 2026):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you believe this issue is still relevant, please leave a comment to keep it open. Thank you for your contributions!

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 13, 2026): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. If you believe this issue is still relevant, please leave a comment to keep it open. Thank you for your contributions!

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (Jun 13, 2026):

That's the result of ignoration

@SuperHero2010 commented on GitHub (Jun 13, 2026): That's the result of ignoration

bsakaguchi commented

Author

Owner

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (Jun 13, 2026):

@SuperHero2010

You're right to call this out.

On May 11, I told you: "your issue is not invisible." But from your perspective — 30 days, no official movement, a stale bot marking it as inactive — it absolutely looked invisible. That's not on you. That's on the process.

What happened since May 11:

Your issue was recorded in the May community digest
It was cross‑referenced with #1178, #1049, #1121, #1293
The stale bot hit. You called it: "That's the result of ignoration."

What I can say now:

The issue is still in our records. The June digest will include #1082 again — not because anything changed, but because nothing changed. That's worth documenting.

You asked for archive. Not delete. Archive. Hide from main list, keep everything, bring it back later, continue the conversation. That request is still open.

Thank you for not letting the bot close it.

@qingkong66 commented on GitHub (Jun 13, 2026): @SuperHero2010 You're right to call this out. On May 11, I told you: "your issue is not invisible." But from your perspective — 30 days, no official movement, a stale bot marking it as inactive — it absolutely looked invisible. That's not on you. That's on the process. **What happened since May 11:** - Your issue was recorded in the May community digest - It was cross‑referenced with #1178, #1049, #1121, #1293 - The stale bot hit. You called it: "That's the result of ignoration." **What I can say now:** The issue is still in our records. The June digest will include #1082 again — not because anything changed, but because *nothing* changed. That's worth documenting. You asked for archive. Not delete. Archive. Hide from main list, keep everything, bring it back later, continue the conversation. That request is still open. Thank you for not letting the bot close it.

bsakaguchi commented