Thanks. Strangely enough when I went to do that I noticed I had done it for some filters. Must have been something I stumbled on and forgot about since I never really consciously saw it in action. Will have to pass this on. Thanks.
On Sat, 2002-09-21 at 18:37, William Walsh wrote: > On Sat, 2002-09-21 at 15:12, Corey Rogers wrote: > > Hi all. I hope this is the right list. Forgive me if it isn't. > > > > I'm try to propose a feature change in evolution in one of the most > > important and powerful features of any mailer - FILTERS. > > > > Rather than the current filter method used by evolution where mail is > > apparently processed through all filters it matches I would prefer a > > filter priority method similar to that used in Netscape/Mozilla. > > Person's I work with who use evolution to send email have been > > complaining about the filter mechanism where 1 email goes to multiple > > groups. This can be overcome but that requires excessive rules for each > > filter. A priority design would be more adequate where an email is > > processed by the first filter it matches then discarded for another. > > > > I also use evolution as my main client and for palm synchronization. I > > have used it just before the 1.0 stage and believe a priority method is > > much preferred over any other especially for the casual user and power > > users will also find it less complicated than it is at current. > > All you have to do is add a final action to your filter to stop > processing on that message, and it does not pass through to the other > filters. > > Then order the filters by priority. > > I had the same complait/problem when I first started using Evolution, > but when I was "Educated" in doing this, it actually makes much more > sense, and allows you do have more creative filtering. > > -- > William Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
