Open Bug 1782692 Opened 6 months ago Updated 3 months ago

[meta] 102 upgrade is destroying addressbooks (often reported in support)

Categories

(Thunderbird :: Address Book, defect, P1)

Thunderbird 102

Tracking

(Not tracked)

UNCONFIRMED

People

(Reporter: dskirk, Unassigned)

References

(Blocks 2 open bugs)

Details

(Keywords: dataloss, meta)

Attachments

(1 obsolete file)

Steps to reproduce:

I volunteer on SUMO and we receive numerous complaints from those upgrading to 102, stating that addressbooks are empty after upgrade.

Actual results:

Addressbook found empty after upgrade.

Expected results:

Addressbook should have remained as before.

Thanks David. That's not good at all!

Can you please link some sample reports here?

Severity: -- → S2
Component: Untriaged → Address Book
Flags: needinfo?(dskirk)
Priority: -- → P1
Summary: 102 upgrade is destroying addressbooks → 102 upgrade is destroying addressbooks (often reported in support)

My error for not logging them all. Here is one:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1384717 There have been so many problems, with lost accounts, lost messages, lost addressbooks, and many seeking to downgrade to 91 or quitting Thunderbird. I will work to capture more as I see them.

Flags: needinfo?(dskirk)

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1384717 - Not many details.
Note that https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1304589 and https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1321506 were reported in 2020 and 2021 for earlier versions. Too bad no one helped the guy who lost 800 customer addresses back in 2020 :-(

I don't know if this is related or not. The addressbook is there after upgrade, but search can't find anything.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1384985

When the 2020 and 2021 items were reported I think some issues were still being investigated (and fixed). So IMO there's a fair chance they were since resolved.

As for the current reports, address book migration is quite old, so I'd suspect these may not be related to the past ones, and I'd worry some new issue has emerged in version 102. But with roughly 500k users on version 102 and only a few issues reported, if there is in fact an issue, I doubt we are facing a problem of huge proportions. I've posted a response in those support topics.

On upgrading, the 4 custom fields which were all used for every entry and present in the address book in 91.12 are now not present in the new 102 address book.

Flags: needinfo?(vseerror)

Upgrade to 102.2.0. Bug 1776129

Many addresses are not completely gone but cannot be found or the contact is split into several pieces, telephone numbers missing.
The data base is corrupted. Some still work as they should.
I have to look them up and insert manually.
Other descriptions are more thorough as I just found out.

Mac OS 10.15.7 Catalina, TB 102.2

I used to be able to drag an e-mail address from an address book into a mailing list, and in the mailing list detail the complete record for that address was shown. Now there is no apparent way to add an e-mail address from an address book to a mailing list. Dragging an address to a mailing list does not highlight the destination icon, and no copy occurs.

Did I see a config page way to restore the old format address book? The new one is so different in design, that I find it unusable.

(In reply to DavidBeard46 from comment #8)

On upgrading, the 4 custom fields which were all used for every entry and present in the address book in 91.12 are now not present in the new 102 address book.

David, as Magnus tried to point out, upgrading to 102.2.0 will return the 4 custom fields (clearing ni?wsmwk because the question is answered).

(In reply to Magnus Melin [:mkmelin] from comment #9)

Upgrade to 102.2.0. Bug 1776129

(In reply to DavidBeard46 from comment #11)

I used to be able to drag an e-mail address from an address book into a mailing list, and in the mailing list detail the complete record for that address was shown. Now there is no apparent way to add an e-mail address from an address book to a mailing list. Dragging an address to a mailing list does not highlight the destination icon, and no copy occurs.

Dragging a contact to a mailing list is possible for contacts which are in the same AB as the mailing list (see screenshot attachment 9285687 [details]). Unfortunately, due to old bug 1779825 and new bug 1782397, it's pretty hard for users to discover the only way that works.

Did I see a config page way to restore the old format address book? The new one is so different in design, that I find it unusable.

No config option, but please try this: Address book > List display options > Switch to horizontal layout.

^^

Flags: needinfo?(vseerror)

(In reply to Thomas D. (:thomas8) from comment #12)

(In reply to DavidBeard46 from comment #8)

On upgrading, the 4 custom fields which were all used for every entry and present in the address book in 91.12 are now not present in the new 102 address book.

David, as Magnus tried to point out, upgrading to 102.2.0 will return the 4 custom fields (clearing ni?wsmwk because the question is answered).

Yes, sorry. I did this and it works and I have them back. A good call from Magnus Melin [:mkmelin]
See my discovered solution to the other problem below.

(In reply to Magnus Melin [:mkmelin] from comment #9)

Upgrade to 102.2.0. Bug 1776129

(In reply to DavidBeard46 from comment #11)

I used to be able to drag an e-mail address from an address book into a mailing list, and in the mailing list detail the complete record for that address was shown. Now there is no apparent way to add an e-mail address from an address book to a mailing list. Dragging an address to a mailing list does not highlight the destination icon, and no copy occurs.

Dragging a contact to a mailing list is possible for contacts which are in the same AB as the mailing list (see screenshot attachment 9285687 [details]). Unfortunately, due to old bug 1779825 and new bug 1782397, it's pretty hard for users to discover the only way that works.

I have found a solution which I think is what you were describing. The address book entry to be added to a mailing list is in 'Personal Address Book'. The destination mailing lists are all in another Address book called 'Imported'. I am able to drag the new entry from 'Personal' into 'Imported', and then I can find it there and drag it into the correct alphabetically-named mailing list created in 'Imported'. Job Done. Thank you. Solved.

Did I see a config page way to restore the old format address book? The new one is so different in design, that I find it unusable.

No config option, but please try this: Address book > List display options > Switch to horizontal layout.
Thank you, and earlier problems are now resolved.

Dragging to the 'Personal Address Book' doesn't work for me.
80 out of some 500+ address entries were lost when updating from TB 91 to 102.
On the Mac/TB only the email address remains, greyed out, name, telephone numbers and other fields are missing and drag/drop/lookup doesn't work anymore. Their complete entries still exist on other devices.

I keep all addresses in a single AB, synced by cardDAV. All "gathered addresses" work, but I rarely need them.
MBP 10,1 retina, Mac OS 10.15.7 Catalina

I do have same problem. It started probably with latest update from 102.2.1 to 102.2.2? It worked before.
Autocomplete for contacts which are in my Personal Address Book does not work anymore. Even "Lists" that I created under Personal Address Book dont work anymore. If I import contacts into new address book, then autocomplete starts working. It seems that my Personal Address Book is "corrupted". I tried with troubleshoot mode (safe mode) but its the same.

What should I do to help debugging this? I use Windows version by the way. 32bit version of TB.

What I just discovered is that, if you create the display names in the "Last name, First Name" format, you need to start typing from the last name for the autocomplete to result in the name and email address. If you start typing from the first name, the autocomplete only results in the email address, leaving the name blank.

Well, what I described above didn't work for all contacts.

What I tried now is that, for contacts autocorrect failing, I go and edit them without doing an actual edit but only click the Save button. That seems to fix the problem.

There is a bug due to some format change in the new version.

(In reply to david from comment #6)

I don't know if this is related or not. The addressbook is there after upgrade, but search can't find anything.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1384985

This one ends up being bug 1789793. The fix is being delivered in 102.3.0 in the next several days.

For the other issues:

Many addresses are not completely gone but cannot be found or the contact is split into several pieces, telephone numbers missing.
The data base is corrupted. Some still work as they should.

I do have same problem. It started probably with latest update from 102.2.1 to 102.2.2? It worked before.
Autocomplete for contacts which are in my Personal Address Book does not work anymore. Even "Lists" that I created under Personal Address Book dont work anymore.

Dragging to the 'Personal Address Book' doesn't work for me.
80 out of some 500+ address entries were lost when updating from TB 91 to 102.
On the Mac/TB only the email address remains, greyed out, name, telephone numbers and other fields are missing and drag/drop/lookup doesn't work anymore. Their complete entries still exist on other devices.

If version 102.3.0 does not help your issue, then please file a NEW bug report. Thanks

Keywords: meta
Summary: 102 upgrade is destroying addressbooks (often reported in support) → [meta] 102 upgrade is destroying addressbooks (often reported in support)
Attached file adressbook (obsolete) —
Attachment #9297973 - Attachment is obsolete: true

Is anyone still seeing this going from 102.n to 102.n+1 ?

Everything works for me (Mac OS 10.15.7) since 102.3.x, you have to reload your contacts and name (again) the default addressbook source.

You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.