13145 - Several actions in one mail filter, multiple action support.

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(MailNews Core :: Filters, enhancement, P3)

Description

[Henrik Lynggaard Hansen]

Quite simple in concept actually

Instead of having just one action per filter. people could assign several action
s to a filter like

if (sender.contains(mozilla.org)
{
 move to folder("Mozilla)
 and set Priority(high)
}

Comment 1

[Phil Peterson]

Moving this to the HELP WANTED list, and cc'ing bienvenu, in case there's
overlap with his work to allow filters to put things in the flash panel.

Comment 2

[Phil Peterson]

*** Bug 16749 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3

[laurel]

*** Bug 59369 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 4

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

alecf and I have been talking about criteria. We decided that a down arrow 
should be provided on the left hand side of the criteria so that one can choose 
other criteria formats. I think this should also be the case for choosing 
different actions. One would click add, and then hit the down arrow, and a set 
of choices would appear. Then after choosing the format, one could set the 
options such as the priority status (low, medium, or high). Please look at bug 
59368 for information.

I believe you should make this a tracking bug and create dependents of this bug 
that are what your ideas of additional actions are (such as I did for macros).

Comment 5

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

Adding myself as CC.

Comment 6

[laurel]

*** Bug 80440 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7

[Håkan Waara]

-> Filters

Comment 8

[Håkan Waara]

*** Bug 107555 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 9

[Brice Ruth]

Is any work proceeding on this (or subparts of this bug?) I see the helpwanted
tag ... I'm in the process of getting Moz built on my native platform (OS X) -
once that's done, hopefully I'll be in a position to contribute.

Comment 10

[Brian 'netdragon' Bober]

brice: OK. I would email the bug owner and ask him what needs to be done in
order to contribute for this bug and then you can decide if its something you
can complete in a reasonable amount of time.

Comment 11

[laurel]

*** Bug 138078 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 12

[R.K.Aa.]

*** Bug 147202 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 13

[laurel]

*** Bug 146249 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 14

[laurel]

*** Bug 125420 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 15

[Alfonso Martinez]

*** Bug 174937 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 16

[R.K.Aa.]

laurel: is this one of the bugs you mean in bug 174441 comment 1?

Comment 17

[laurel]

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17441 ***

Comment 18

[laurel]

Oops, wrong bug number (left out a 4) and didn't notice this bug is marked as
blocking others... will leave it open and when bug 174441 is fixed, will deal with.
sorry for confusion

Comment 19

[Jonadab the Unsightly One (Nathan Eady)]

The other way to handle this would be to introduce flow control into the
filter sets, like Pegasus Mail has; that would have the additional benefit
of also solving bug 59821.  It lacks the full benefits of complete 
scriptability (a la Gnus), but bug 11057 is going in that direction, so
doing it here would be redundant.

Comment 20

[Sander]

So now that bug 174441 is fixed, should this be marked fixed as well? Laurel?

Comment 21

[Igor Velkov]

Attachment: lost scroller in filter conditions

Now we can use more that one action in one rule. But, as previous, we cannot :
a) copy message to another folder
b) forward message to anybody. 
It's bad :)

Then, look to the my attached screenshot - we lost place to set more that one
condition in filter. Place only for one rule, no scrollers to scrom to another
that first.

Comment 22

[Sander]

Igor: that's bug 180144.
There are also seperate bugs for forwarding (bug 11034) and copying email (bug
61635) with filters.

Comment 23

[Vaclav Dvorak]

I believe that this bug is fixed by bug 174441 (if you disagree, say what's left
to do in _this_ bug). It should really be resolved as duplicate, but marking
fixed because of the dependencies.