1921170 - alphabetical sorting of filters

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Thunderbird :: Filters, enhancement)

Description

[JC]

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Steps to reproduce:

It is really not a bug per se. However, It is so surprising that there is no sorting for message filters. Most filter-using users have over 10 and it is hard to locate the exact filter you want to modify every time. Please add a sort to the filter list.

Expected results:

There should have just been a sort (alphabetical sort) for the filters' list. Without that, it is so hard to look for the one you want to edit if you have over 10 filters which most power users do.

Comment 1

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

Thank you for the suggestion. I'm not finding any duplicates of this. But there is a matching suggestion at https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/email-filter-rules-lists/idi-p/25151

it is so hard to look for the one you want to edit

I don't understand the reasoning here. I have one account with 100+ filters for about a decade and never felt the need to sort the rules list. I do however frequently use the "search filters by name" - that doesn't help you?

Also, sorting the list would at least in my case ruin the filtering process because there most of my rules must be run in a specific order to be effective.

Do you really always want to rules alphabetical? Or do you just want them temporarily alphabetical?

Most filter-using users have over 10

You have statistics that that effect?

Comment 2

[Anje]

I have had people in Support Forum ask for a means of sorting but they problem is that Message Filters operate in the order listed.
You change that order and it might effect the results of filters.

Perhaps a 'search' would be more useful than a sort.
So you search for items starting with eg: TH and list appears of matching options
When you select item/filter name in search list it auto scrolls to selected item in actual Filter list.
Thus not actually altering the list order.

Comment 3

[JC]

It makes sense. However, searching will again defeat the purpose. I feel editing filters and order of action are two different things. Having these in one place seems to be the issue here. Perhaps, we need a separate screen for ordering where the admin can drag filters up and down to dictate the order in which filters should be applied. It is currently being done on the same screen. Typically, users are always adding and editing filters. Very rarely do they have to update the order. The point is being able to find and edit filters is more important and searching alone will defeat the purpose as eyeballing and locating the filter you want to edit or searching the name etc (if you remember it) are equally cumbersome. Hope you guys agree. PErsonally, i use filters a lot and I bet most power users or users who get a lot of emails do too. So, appreciate if this is factored in.

Thanks and Regards,
JC

Comment 4

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

The suggestion of having two screens for rules management (one for ordering and one for other purposes), I think that is a non-starter that UX team will not approve.

Typically, users are always adding and editing filters.

Yes.

So I come back to my question of what is your actual use case and problem (start with the problem, not what you think the solution might be) ...

Problems:

1. You state one problem is finding filters. Is that because a) you can't remember the name or b) an't remember what certain filters do, or c) both?
2. What are your other problems, if any?

Comment 5

[JC]

Hi Thunderbird Team,

I wanted to share some feedback after many years of using Thunderbird. As mentioned earlier, managing filters requires regular updates by adding new data or rules. Given the large number of filters I work with, finding the right one to edit can be a challenge. Currently, the search feature doesn't seem to help much in this case. While it might be useful, relying solely on remembering filter names and typing them each time isn't ideal.

If adding a new screen for this isn't feasible, I suggest a simple option to sort filters alphabetically. This could be a convenience feature that doesn’t affect the actual processing order but simply assists in locating the right filter quickly. Users with many filters could benefit from a checkbox to enable alphabetical sorting when editing filters without changing their execution order.

Additionally, within each filter, there are often many rows for things like email IDs, subject lines, or body text, and these too lack sorting. Scanning through a long list in no particular order (likely in the sequence they were added) to find an email ID is time-consuming. I believe sortable tables for this kind of data are essential for efficient management.

I hope this illustrates how valuable this feature would be for users like me. It’s enough of a pain point that I finally created an account just to provide this feedback after years of use. Now that I’m here, I’ll probably keep checking in with more thoughts!

That said, I don’t have any major issues beyond these. Thunderbird is fantastic – on par with the classic Outlook before they made changes. However, I do have a few additional requests that might improve the experience:

Calendar integration for easier scheduling.
Right-click spam filtering for entire domains instead of individual email IDs (like BlueMail’s feature).
Improved font color options – the ability to quickly switch between previously used colors, without needing to manually select from the palette each time.
Better table management – the current process for adding, editing, or even deleting tables is cumbersome. It’s quicker to copy-paste data into another application than to make changes directly in Thunderbird.
Thanks again for the hard work you put into Thunderbird. You’re doing an amazing job, and I look forward to future improvements!

Best regards,
JC

Comment 6

[Magnus Melin [:mkmelin] (away, back Aug 4)]

Thanks for the suggestion, but I don't think we want this. As mentioned, the filters are in order. I'm also not sure alphabetical filtering would be useful: it would require being super careful about how you name your filters to begin with.

Comment 7

[JC]

Wow, that is sheer arrogance. It started with "I think" .

You are telling me that I need to remember 100-odd filters by name because these appear in the order of creation. Then, I also remember all my rules and eyeball it every time I am looking for an email ID, domain, or subject line that I might have added previously. If apps were designed because developers and arrogant architects thought they were doing a great job already and did not take user feedback into account, then yes, you will remain primitive forever.

Thank you guys. This is so disappointing. You mark it resolved because you think you know better. Shame on you!!

Comment 8

[Thilo [:ThiloteE]]

Alphabetical ordering doesn't change the fact that you still have to remember the name of your filters, otherwise how would you know that you have to look at a "B" instead of "O" etc.?

While I like alphabetical ordering in some settings, I am not in favour of introducing it here, as it would lead to unintended consequences of filters running earlier than they should. I have a clear hierarchy in my filters and if you make sort by A-Z mandatory, you would destroy my setup completely and force me to go through all my filters to re-adjust to maintain the hierarchy. So, if anything, such a feature should be optional and backwards compatible. Newbies to Thunderbird might use A-Z without knowing the pitfalls too...

The work needed to introduce this feature might also better be spent on other more serious problems, especially since a workaround exists. You can always have a workflow of naming filters and then moving them to the correct A-Z position manually. If your naming scheme is good, it will also be very easy to locate them with the search feature.

For example, if you have filters related to the tool "Thunderbird", you could name them like this:

TB-Planning
TB-Github
TB-Forum
TB-Bugzilla
TB

Then when you search for "TB", you will find them all.

Comment 9

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

Attachment: Example filter names

(In reply to JC from comment #7)

Wow, that is sheer arrogance. It started with "I think" .

Attacking other people in bugzilla is unacceptable. Please refrain from doing so.

Instead of fully describing the problem (as you seem to have done in the next sentence) you insisted on sorting as a solution, and it is on that basis that the bug has been closed. I see nothing wrong with that decision from a senior developer.

You are telling me that I need to remember 100-odd filters by name because these appear in the order of creation. Then, I also remember all my rules and eyeball it every time I am looking for an email ID, domain, or subject line that I might have added previously. If apps were designed because developers and arrogant architects thought they were doing a great job already and did not take user feedback into account, then yes, you will remain primitive forever.

A better description of the problem is what I was attempting to get from you. The description above I think now gets to the heart of it - you want to be informed why something is being filtered and what action will be taken, without opening up the filter?

Again, a highly descriptive naming scheme for your filters would help, something that hints at precisely what the filter does. I have attached an example of my filter naming - most of the names indicate what is being filtered and what action will be taken. You haven't fully described your current naming, so it's impossible to know if you are doing something similar.

Beyond that, perhaps a summary of a filter's contents when you click on or mouse over it? Or a View that you can scroll, similar to the folder or message list, which expands or collapses to show details of each folder?

Comment 10

[JC]

Hi again, TEam Thunderbird,
I hope this message finds you well. Please allow me to clarify that my intent is not to attack anyone but to offer feedback on a process that could benefit from further refinement.

I understand that sometimes decisions are made based on individual judgment. However, marking an issue as "resolved" without fully addressing the concerns raised, or considering it based solely on personal assumptions (e.g., "I think so" or "I know better"), can make it challenging for users like myself to engage constructively. It leaves me unsure of who to approach or how to proceed, resulting in frustration.

This is especially concerning in environments such as open-source projects, where accountability may seem diffuse compared to commercial products with dedicated customer service. While I appreciate the community-driven nature of open-source, dismissing power user feedback without proper consideration could alienate long-time supporters and contributors. Ignoring or downplaying such input could have a long-term impact, regardless of how minor it may seem at the moment.

One area that I believe needs immediate attention is the sorting of rules within filters. The current design combines the order in which rules are applied with the order in which they are displayed. This can be confusing and inefficient, especially for users who manage numerous filters. The lack of sorting functionality within these lists makes it cumbersome to locate specific filters or rules, and the need to manually search for filters by typing each time can be time-consuming.

Furthermore, within each filter, there are often multiple rules (e.g., for subjects, email addresses, and body text). Without proper sorting, finding a specific entry—whether an email ID, domain, or keyword—becomes a tedious process. Implementing a basic sorting function would greatly improve the user experience, particularly for those handling large volumes of filters and rules.

I understand that not every request can be immediately implemented, but I believe acknowledging such feedback as a potential long-term enhancement, even if not immediately actionable, would demonstrate a commitment to continuous improvement.

As someone who runs a company offering multiple SaaS products, I recognize the importance of listening to users. The most valuable insights often come directly from user experience, and balancing internal decisions with external feedback is crucial for sustainable growth.

Thank you for considering my feedback. I hope this can lead to a more open dialogue and improvements that benefit all users.

Best,
JC

Comment 11

[Anje]

I'm confused by what is being requested because I name Filters in a way that faciltates a search. So never have a problem.

The point is being able to find and edit filters. finding the right one to edit can be a challenge.
There should have just been a sort (alphabetical sort) for the filters' list. Without that, it is so hard to look for the one you want to edit.
relying solely on remembering filter names and typing them each time isn't ideal.

The current design combines the order in which rules are applied with the order in which they are displayed.

As people create Message Filters they get auto appended to the list, so appear at the bottom and if they are left as is then as you append another filter it will run as last filter. BUT, that is only if you choose it to run that way.
It is understood and the information states - the order that filters run is the order displayed, so if you need to have the last created filter run first then you sort the displayed order accordingly. That's why there is a 'Move to top' and other buttons.
Those buttons are designed to allow the user to choose the order in which filters run.

The search is based on 'Filter name'.
You can even enter a single letter and it will return any filter that contains that letter.
Ideally, you will have named filters in a useful manner.
eg: Maybe named using folder it is directed into or company initials if collecting emails from a specific client.

So remembering the actual full name of filter is only partially required.
The current search aleady offers the ability to track down a filter name.
But if you have no idea what you are looking for because you have not eg: used suitable Filter names, then sorting alphabetically will not resolve the problem.

The next bit seems to be the real issue.....You want to find another way of locating a Filter or selection of Filters when you have no idea what that filter is called.

within each filter, there are often multiple rules (e.g., for subjects, email addresses, and body text). Without proper sorting, finding a specific entry—whether an email ID, domain, or keyword—becomes a tedious process. Implementing a basic sorting function would greatly improve the user experience, particularly for those handling large volumes of filters and rules.

It sounds like you are wanting a search within all filters for eg: 'From' and 'contains' search criteria <domain>
So in the same way as Quick Filter offers 'Body' and 'Subject' for you to select.
You would be looking to select from a drop down list of all items that appear in the first criteria list eg: From
and then type the actual search criteria - domain name
and a click on 'search' button would scan through all filters contained in 'msgFilterRules.dat' file of the account.
Returning all 'Filter names' that contain the criteria.

Comment 12

[Wayne Mery (:wsmwk)]

Seems like the heart of the issue is a match to bug 1266503.
Does anyone disagree?