impossible to pick "None" as Incoming server

RESOLVED INCOMPLETE

Status

--
enhancement
RESOLVED INCOMPLETE
8 years ago
7 years ago

People

(Reporter: mail, Unassigned)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: [CLOSEME 2012-03-01][wontfix?])

(Reporter)

Description

8 years ago
User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.19) Gecko/2010091807 Iceweasel/3.0.6 (Debian-3.0.6-3)
Build Identifier: 3.1.6

On the "Receiving Email" tab in the preferences of the mail client Evolution, the dropdown after "Server Type:" allows me to pick "None", and then click the "Forward" button.

Your mail client Thunderbird forces me to enter an Incoming server before it allows me to select "Create Account".

I do not wish to use an incoming server, nor have I been provided one. I want to use only an outgoing server.

This means I cannot use your program.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. In the "Mail Account Setup" pop-up, keep the Incoming server empty.
2. Press "Re-test Configuration".
Actual Results:  
The "Create Account" button cannot be clicked.

Expected Results:  
The "Create Account" button should be clickable.
Also, the user should been able to select "None" as the Incoming server.

Evolution allows its users to pick "None" as the incoming server. This makes sense, since some users want office e-mails to be forwarded to their home accounts, but still want to be able to reply using their office e-mail address.

In all honesty, I think it's unbelievable that something as basic as this isn't possible with an e-mail client that has existed for over 7 years. Also, someone at some point decided that your program would _force_ users to pick an incoming server: why did this person decide this; in the words of James Rolfe: "What was this guy thinking?!"
I'm not sure we want to support this.
Whiteboard: wontfix?
You can cancel out of the account manager, and then select File -> New -> Other Accounts and choose e.g. news and blogs or Newsgroup accounts.

The news & blogs option will let you set Thunderbird up without requiring a server. I believe that you'd then be able to send email if you went into account options and set up an outgoing server.

That's the possible workaround.

I'm inclined to agree with Ludovic that we don't want/need to support this. N. de Jorge, what's the actual use case here? Why do you want to be able to send from within a client, but not actually able to receive email with that same client.

Comment 3

7 years ago
Is the multiple identities feature on one real account not sufficient? Does inputting some nonexistent server not work?
Severity: normal → enhancement
(In reply to N. de Jonge from comment #0)
> On the "Receiving Email" tab in the preferences of the mail client
> Evolution, the dropdown after "Server Type:" allows me to pick "None", and
> then click the "Forward" button.
> Your mail client Thunderbird forces me to enter an Incoming server before it
> allows me to select "Create Account".

Sorry but it's current implementation of Tb.
In Tb, as aceman says, there is similar and simple account definition - Manual Setup with non-existent POP3 server(dummy POP3 server). The dummy POP3 account can be used like psuedo account named "Local Folders" in Tb.
Following are restriction in it.
 - To enter Manual Setup, user need to do multiple steps,
   - Type non-existent server upon account creation request,
     Cancel at auto-config immediately,
     Manual Setup with POP3 as server type.
 - If "Get Mail" is clicked, Tb tries to access the non-existent/dummy POP3
   server, then connection fails due to non-existent server.

> since some users want office e-mails to be forwarded to their home accounts,

As aceman says, Tb has "multiple identities" feature since early stage of Tb implementation for such use case. In "multiple identities" of Tb, there is no need to define additional account. In Tb, following is sufficient.
  Simply add email address of office e-mail as "additional identity"
  to existent account in Tb who is owenr of mbox at server.
This is a reason why Tb doesn't have capability of "None" as user selectable server type.

Comment 5

7 years ago
Just one problem:
I am not sure you can define separate SMTP server for each identity in one account. Some SMTP servers may reject email sending under identity that does not have their own allowed suffix (domain). But some ISP smtp servers allow that when you authenticate to them using username/password.
(In reply to aceman from comment #5)
> I am not sure you can define separate SMTP server for each identity in one account.

In Tb, SMTP server definition and POP3/IMAP account's server definition is independent, although auto-config has capability to define both at once.
 (1) Add SMTP server defiition via "Outgoing Server(SMTP)"
     which is placed at bottom of account list of Account Settings.
 (2) Associate the SMTP server via Identity's "Outgoing Server(SMTP):" choice.

Comment 7

7 years ago
N. de Jonge, would any of the proposals work for you?
Whiteboard: wontfix? → [CLOSEME 2012-03-01][wontfix?]
(Reporter)

Comment 8

7 years ago
> Is the multiple identities feature on
> one real account not sufficient?

Too complicated.

> Does inputting some nonexistent server not work?

It does, but what kind of **** solution is that? I cannot believe that you considered that to be a proper solution to this problem. It's like saying to someone who wants a browser to start with a blank page: just create an empty HTML file on your hard disk and use that file as you home page. Try to think from the user's perspective. I'm a user and I don't want to use an incoming server. You may think I'm the only person on the planet who wants this, but as a user I don't care what you think; I will just continue to use Evolution since that program allows me to do what I want.

All Ludovic Hirlimann wrote in this thread was: "I'm not sure we want to support this." Without any arguments or even the tiniest explanation. Then Mark Banner suggests a workaround. I don't want a workaround, I want to use proper, user-friendly programs. Banner writes he agrees with Ludovic that you don't want/need to support this, again without using any arguments. He then asks "what's the actual use case here", even though I described this in my bug report.

Then Banner writes: "Why do you want to be able to send from within a client, but not actually able to receive email with that same client." In my opinion there is only one wise answer I can give him: it doesn't matter why I want it; I want it. I don't need to justify my reasons, I don't want to get in that kind of discussion. I know what I want and I don't want workarounds or alternatives. That's why I'm using Evolution, because that's one of the clients that allows me to select "None" as the incoming server. As far as I know the folks from Evolution didn't add that option just for me.

Then there's a bunch of technobabble from WADA and what looks like more workarounds. Why should users have to look into workarounds, they aren't all geeks who will be able to find your suggestions in this thread. I'm sorry folks, I reported this over a year ago and none of this seems to go anywhere. Not enough people seem to care and you seem to be satisfied with the available workarounds. So, just close the ticket (as fixed or invalid, or whatever).

Comment 9

7 years ago
Please I still do not understand what is the missing functionality in Thunderbird? If you put in "None" as the name of the incoming server in the Account wizard and then do not let TB check the server or go into the advanced settings and disable "Automatically download messages" and "Get messages at startup" and "get message every x minutes". If you never press the Get Mail button then TB will not ever contact the server. Even if you accidentally do, it will simply give an error. So what exactly is missing here?

If we wanted to support the configuration you wish, how should it behave? Just disable the Get Mail button? Is that the only change? Or what else? Please specify.

Comment 10

7 years ago
(In reply to N. de Jonge from comment #8)
> > Is the multiple identities feature on
> > one real account not sufficient?
> 
> Too complicated.

We think this is much less complicated than creating a new dummy account. See bug 44863 for details.

I have found other requests for the feature you want (e.g. Bug 154408).
RESOLVED INCOMPLETE due to lack of response to last question. If you feel this change was made in error, please respond to this bug with your reasons why.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → INCOMPLETE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.