1144812 - Add comment about conditions of effectiveness to account setting "Move new junk messages to"

Status: NEW

(MailNews Core :: Account Manager, defect)

Description

[Ulf Zibis]

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0
Build ID: 20150306135716

Steps to reproduce:

Configure in account: "Move new junk messages to" 
Manually mark email in INBOX as Junk


Actual results:

Nothing except the flag


Expected results:

email should be moved to Junk folder

Comment 1

[Ulf Zibis]

I tested on IMAP account, not sure if it happens on POP account too.

Comment 2

[:aceman]

I do not understand how the bug summary relates to the description.
Because "when I mark messages as junk" is a global setting in Options, not a per account setting.
I am not sure where the other mentioned settings are.

Can better describe the problem?

Comment 3

[rsx11m]

The bug opener's point as I understand is that if you disable Junk processing in the global preferences, the group "Destination and Retention" in the "Junk Settings" page of an account should be completely disabled to indicate that it doesn't have any function at this time.

Comment 4

[rsx11m]

Err, I think I've still got it wrong, though. The preferences version seems to relate to *manual* marking of junk whereas account-specific settings are for *automatically* identified and to-be-moved messages. Thus, to that extent, they should be independent from each other.

Comment 5

[:aceman]

Exactly.

Comment 6

[Ulf Zibis]

The problem is, if none of the following settings is enabled:
    global:  "When messages are manually marked as junk"
             -> "move them to the account's Junk folder"
    account: "Aktivate Junk-Filter"
, the account setting "Move new junk messages to" is meaningless.

Alternatively to disabling the group "Destination and Retention" in the "Junk Settings" page of an account we could add a hint, that one of the above setting should be enabled to make it work.

Additionally, "Trust Junk-Headers of this external Filters" too seems meaningless, if "Aktivate Junk-Filter" is disabled.
Also, "Trust Junk-Headers of this external Filter*s*" only relates to *one* filter, so the description should use the singular form of "Filter".

I too think, all the Junk settings should be account-wise.

Comment 7

[:aceman]

(In reply to Ulf Zibis from comment #6)
> The problem is, if none of the following settings is enabled:
>     global:  "When messages are manually marked as junk"
>              -> "move them to the account's Junk folder"
>     account: "Aktivate Junk-Filter"
> , the account setting "Move new junk messages to" is meaningless.

> Alternatively to disabling the group "Destination and Retention" in the
> "Junk Settings" page of an account we could add a hint, that one of the
> above setting should be enabled to make it work.

OK, this seems to make sense now. I could do this, but I'd like to hear from Ian and Kent first whether there isn't any other case missing for which the group should stay enabled.

> Additionally, "Trust Junk-Headers of this external Filters" too seems
> meaningless, if "Aktivate Junk-Filter" is disabled.
In original English version, the first label is "Enable adaptive junk mail controls". So it describes one option "adaptive" and the "junk headers" is another one. Those options are not exclusive and you can choose any combination of them.

> Also, "Trust Junk-Headers of this external Filter*s*" only relates to *one*
> filter, so the description should use the singular form of "Filter".
In original English version, the label is "Trust junk mail headers set by:" so there is no plural of "filters" in there.

If there is an ambiguity of the labels in your localized TB version, please contact the localizer.

Comment 8

[Ulf Zibis]

(In reply to :aceman from comment #7)
> (In reply to Ulf Zibis from comment #6)
> > Alternatively to disabling the group "Destination and Retention" in the
> > "Junk Settings" page of an account we could add a hint, that one of the
> > above setting should be enabled to make it work.
> 
> OK, this seems to make sense now. I could do this, but I'd like to hear from
> Ian and Kent first whether there isn't any other case missing for which the
> group should stay enabled.
I think, even you disable the group dynamically, there should be a hint, that enabling is dependent on the 2 settings, because for the user only one of them is visible in that dialogue.

> > Additionally, "Trust Junk-Headers of this external Filters" too seems
> > meaningless, if "Aktivate Junk-Filter" is disabled.
> In original English version, the first label is "Enable adaptive junk mail controls". So it describes one option "adaptive" and the "junk headers" is
> another one. Those options are not exclusive and you can choose any
> combination of them.
Much thanks for the explanation. To me, the current situation, coming from the German translation, made me thinking, that the 2nd setting is dependent from the first. Maybe a different wording could be more clear e.g.:
"Enable adaptive junk mail controls"
"Enable control by junk mail headers set by:"
Both should have or both should not have the term "enable".
The German translation is even worse.

To me it's also not clear from the wording, if TB forces ones messages to be looped through those external filters and after treats them as junk upon the resulting headers, or if TB only interprets existing junk headers, resulting from ones mail server which uses the given filter.

> > Also, "Trust Junk-Headers of this external Filter*s*" only relates to *one*
> > filter, so the description should use the singular form of "Filter".
Please excuse my mistake, the German is correct, but a little difficult to understand.

> If there is an ambiguity of the labels in your localized TB version, please
> contact the localizer.
Where do I find the localizer?

Comment 9

[Kent James (:rkent)]

In addition to the user marking the message as junk, and the bayes filter marking as junk, there are at least two other ways: trusting headers from server spam filters, and spam IMAP flags on messages. I would have to test these and/or dive into the code to be sure of the behavior, but I believe those two also respond the same way that the bayes/adaptive filter does. So you could disable the adaptive/bayes filter and still want messages automatically moved.

Comment 10

[Ian Neal]

Don't think I can add anything further.

Comment 11

[:aceman]

(In reply to Ulf Zibis from comment #8)
> > If there is an ambiguity of the labels in your localized TB version, please
> > contact the localizer.
> Where do I find the localizer?
You can file a bug in the "Mozilla localizations" Product and "de" as Component.

Comment 12

[:aceman]

(In reply to Kent James (:rkent) from comment #9)
> In addition to the user marking the message as junk, and the bayes filter
> marking as junk, there are at least two other ways: trusting headers from
> server spam filters, and spam IMAP flags on messages.

OK, so there seem to be quite some options. It would probably be hard to track them all and disable the checkbox. The case of IMAP spam flags may not even be disableable. Maybe the flags can be set by the server or another client accessing the mailbox.

Do we wontfix this as unfeasible to do?

Comment 13

[Kent James (:rkent)]

"Do we wontfix this as unfeasible to do?"

Original post comment 0 seemed to be a misunderstanding of how the junk settings are used. The current summary seems to continue with that misunderstanding, trying to link together the actions for manual settings of junk with automatic detection of junk.

The root problem here is the very confusing way that all of the junk settings are currently defined. That is a real problem that would be worth fixing. But the current bug does not currently have a proposal that makes sense.

I'd recommend though that we dup this to bug 352428, as when someone gets around to looking at that bug it would be useful to scan the confusion in this bug. If the OP still wants to link the account setting with the global settings, without fixing any of the other issues, I would wontfix that.

Comment 14

[Ulf Zibis]

(In reply to Kent James (:rkent) from comment #13)
> Original post comment 0 seemed to be a misunderstanding of how the junk
> settings are used. The current summary seems to continue with that
> misunderstanding, ...
I agree.

In the mean time before bug 352428 is fixed, I suggest to add a suitable comment in the account settings. Do you agree to change the summary accordingly? E.g.:
Add comment about conditions of effectiveness to account setting "Move new junk messages to"

Suggestion for the comment:
The effectiveness of following settings depends on flags/tags in the incoming messages and/or on enabling Junk actions e.g. global "When I mark a message as junk".

Comment 15

[Kent James (:rkent)]

"Do you agree to change the summary accordingly? ..."

It's OK to morph this bug into an attempt to add wording to clarify this. But keep in mind that we are now past string freeze for Thunderbird 38, so you are looking at April 2016 before any wording change could make it into the product. I don't know if a wording change will help or not, but you are welcome to make proposals.

Comment 16

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

disposition uncertain pending bug 352428, but this is well examined so let's get this off of UNCO