161658 - Filter order not validated when message arrives

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(MailNews Core :: Filters, defect)

Description

[Frank Zimmer]

I have some filters which only apply some changes like 
changing the Priority or the Description of a message and then
an other filter which should move the message to another folder
using an IMAP (unfortunality MS Exchange).
The filter to move the message is defined later than the others as
shown by the screenshot i will add directly

But when now a Message arrives only the move will be done, not the
other changings


I've tried to find an comparable bug inside bugzilla for about 20 Minutes 
but i couldn't find any so i hope that this one is not duplicated.

Using Mozilla 1.0 

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de-AT; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020529

Comment 1

[Frank Zimmer]

Attachment: Filter Screenshot

Comment 2

[Eric Weiss]

I have found a similar problem using POP mail.  The filters are applied to move
messages into directories, but the order appears to be the order they were
created in, not the re-arranged order.

I'm using Mozilla 1.3 for Windows.

Comment 3

[(not reading, please use [e-mail] instead)]

mass re-assign.

Comment 4

[Howard Chu]

(In reply to comment #1)
> Created an attachment (id=94458) [edit]
> Filter Screenshot

I tried setting this up on IMAP and saw this:

Create two filters
  Subject contains test
     Change the priority to Highest
     Flag the message
  Subject contains test
     Move to Trash

When I send myself a message with "test" as the subject, the filters do execute
as specified. However, the Priority is not preserved after the move. I verified
this by disabling the Move to Trash filter - the message was flagged and
priority was Highest. When I enabled the Move to Trash filter and sent another
message, it was moved to Trash with a Normal priority. But it was still flagged.
So this tells me there's nothing wrong with the filter ordering mechanism, just
that some message attributes are not being copied as they ought to be.

Comment 5

[Howard Chu]

I repeated this test using the same filters on a POP3 account.

With the Mark filter above the Move filter, the message was moved and both the
Flag and Priority were set correctly.

With the Move filter above the Mark filter, the message was moved and unmarked.

So I'd say (at least on the trunk) there is no bug for POP3.
I also retested with a filter that set everything I could set:
  Label the message: Later
  Change the priority to: Highest
  Set Junk Status to: Junk
  Mark the message as read
  Flag the message

and all of the settings were shown correctly on the moved messages.
  

Comment 6

[Howard Chu]

(In reply to comment #5)
> So I'd say (at least on the trunk) there is no bug for POP3.
> I also retested with a filter that set everything I could set:
>   Label the message: Later
>   Change the priority to: Highest
>   Set Junk Status to: Junk
>   Mark the message as read
>   Flag the message
> 
> and all of the settings were shown correctly on the moved messages.

Using this filter on IMAP, the Flag and Read status were set correctly. The
label, priority, and junk status were not.

Comment 7

[Howard Chu]

(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > So I'd say (at least on the trunk) there is no bug for POP3.
> > I also retested with a filter that set everything I could set:
> >   Label the message: Later
> >   Change the priority to: Highest
> >   Set Junk Status to: Junk
> >   Mark the message as read
> >   Flag the message
> > 
> > and all of the settings were shown correctly on the moved messages.
> Using this filter on IMAP, the Flag and Read status were set correctly. The
> label, priority, and junk status were not.

This bug appears to be related to bug 181561 (for the Priority flag) and bug 
261297 (junk status) and maybe also bug 254589 

Comment 8

[(not reading, please use [e-mail] instead)]

sorry for the spam.  making bugzilla reflect reality as I'm not working on these bugs.  filter on FOOBARCHEESE to remove these in bulk.

Comment 9

[Serge Gautherie (:sgautherie)]

Filter on "Nobody_NScomTLD_20080620"

Comment 10

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

is junk status/bug 261297 the only issue remaining?

Comment 11

[Joshua Cranmer [:jcranmer]]

RESO WFM per whiteboard.