Closed
Bug 278052
Opened 20 years ago
Closed 19 years ago
Filter using address book does not work on IMAP when running filter after the fact
Categories
(Thunderbird :: General, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: mans, Assigned: Bienvenu)
References
(Depends on 1 open bug)
Details
(Keywords: fixed1.8.1, verified1.8.1.3)
Attachments
(1 file)
2.11 KB,
patch
|
mscott
:
superreview+
mscott
:
approval-branch-1.8.1+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041107 Firefox/1.0
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20041107 Firefox/1.0
I've got procmail handling my spam tagged by spamassassin, sending it straight
to a subfolder of INBOX called "spam" on my IMAP server.
All is well, except I'd like to have TB handle messages which come in to the
"spam" box but are from people in my addressbok and send them back to INBOX. So
I made a filter like so:
if sender is in my address book "personal address book" move to folder INBOX
Seems straightforward enough, but it simply does not work. I try to run it
manually, it does not work. All mail stays in my spam box, whether it's from a
sender in my adress book or not.
Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Make IMAP subfolder
2. Put emails from ppl in your address book there
3. Create filter to move them to inbox
Actual Results:
Nothing
Expected Results:
E-mails sitting in the folder which are from senders in my address book should
have been moved to inbox.
I have exactly the same problem. It's nice to see that I'm not completely
alone, but perhaps this is still not a very popular problem. Nevertheless, once
it came to light, it seemed pretty glaring. These filter options just do
nothing. And I'd prefer not to add all my contacts' addresses one by one to the
filter. For me it seems connected to a bigger problem, though. Thunderbird is
generally not recognizing my contacts properly. The advanced option "Show only
display name for people in my address book" has no effect either. And selecting
the message view "People I Know" comes up with nothing; it ignores those
messages in the folder from people I've placed in my address book, which is what
it's meant to do, I assume.
Thanks for reading.
Comment 2•20 years ago
|
||
I'm quite sure this bug depends on (or is related to) #270785
It seems that thunderbird run filters on the INBOX folder only (even no subfolders)
Depends on: 270785
Filters based on the address book do not seem to work even on the INBOX folder.
Create a filter that moves email from INBOX to "Pete" if sender address is
"pete@pete.com", and apply the filter; it moves emails as expected.
Create an address book called "Petes" and put pete@pete.com in it, then create a
filter that moves email to "Pete" if they appear in the "Petes" address book; no
email is moved. I can't make it work with custom address books or the default
ones - it seems that combining address book filters with an IMAP server just
doesn't work.
Comment 4•19 years ago
|
||
This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01".
This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that
bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are
highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code.
While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we
are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce
this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a
copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and
you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug
(given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more
reproduction information if you have it.
If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not
changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved.
Thank you for your help in this matter.
The latest beta releases can be obtained from:
Firefox: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/
Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html
Seamonkey: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•19 years ago
|
||
I don't see it mentioned anywhere, but I assume these are all filters that are
run after the fact, i.e., not on incoming mail.
Summary: Filter using address book does not work on IMAP subfolder → Filter using address book does not work on IMAP when running filter after the fact
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•19 years ago
|
||
run filters after the fact with local scope. Imap filters can't search on body
anyway...
Assignee | ||
Updated•19 years ago
|
Assignee: mscott → bienvenu
Status: UNCONFIRMED → ASSIGNED
Attachment #197741 -
Flags: superreview?(mscott)
Updated•19 years ago
|
Attachment #197741 -
Flags: superreview?(mscott) → superreview+
Assignee | ||
Updated•19 years ago
|
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•19 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 197741 [details] [diff] [review]
proposed fix
I don't think this made 1.5 but I think we should do it for 2.0
Attachment #197741 -
Flags: branch-1.8.1?(mscott)
Updated•19 years ago
|
Attachment #197741 -
Flags: branch-1.8.1?(mscott) → branch-1.8.1+
Assignee | ||
Updated•19 years ago
|
Keywords: fixed1.8.1
*** Bug 331255 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 9•18 years ago
|
||
I have the same problem as the original poster with version 1.5.0.10 (20070317). Can we reopen the bug? All we have is a proposed fix, right? The bug has not been fixed, I think.
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•18 years ago
|
||
It's fixed in 2.0, and on the trunk. That's why the bug is marked fixed. You can try 2.0 now, or wait until 2.0 is officially released.
Updated•18 years ago
|
Keywords: verified1.8.1.3
Comment 11•18 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #10)
> It's fixed in 2.0, and on the trunk. That's why the bug is marked fixed. You
> can try 2.0 now, or wait until 2.0 is officially released.
>
Oh, that's great, thanks. I wasn't sure if it had gotten in or not.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•