Hi Roelef
On 9/5/05, Roelof Otten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He's only mentioning the defragging of the message bases. Actually
that's not hard to do, provided that you've got ample space. Only
thing TB has to do before compressing is to estimate the amount of
space needed for the compressed
On 7/6/05, Tony Boom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
!06/07/2005, 17:12:37: IMAP - 1: Cannot flag messages due to processing error
I wasn't trying to flag anything, I was just trying to read an unread
message. Comments RL?
Not that I represent RL, but I think the flagging message has to do
with
On 6/30/05, Alexander S. Kunz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you a programmer?
I'm not an international-level cricketer or footballer or tennis player,
but that doesn't stop me passing informed comment on them.
Or that what you think informed is.
This whole discussion is just weird. I
On 6/30/05, Dwight A Corrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is at least part of the rub. The product works pretty damn well.
I'd urge you to look at the amount of list traffic. It may work well
for you, but it does not appear to work well as a general purpose mail
client. It's to the point
On 6/30/05, Dwight A Corrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday, June 30, 2005, 1:23:46 PM, Kevin Menard wrote:
I'd urge you to look at the amount of list traffic.
I see the list traffic. Lots of it is the same few people repeating
the same complaints over and over. And threads like
On 6/30/05, Leif Gregory [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
True enough, but you gotta balance that against burnout. They do fix
bugs, it may not be the bug you wanted fixed, but they aren't just
adding all new features without fixing anything broke.
I think the problem is they're fixing bugs that
Hi Paul,
On 6/30/05, Paul Van Noord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the heat of beta testing becomes unbearable why not revert to a
stable version until the beta's are more stable? That is certainly
more productive for all involved and you are the greatest beneficiary
of all because you cannot
On 7/29/05, Liz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We've seen a lot of releases where strange odd things are broken, and
it seems that a lot of unit tests usually done by the developer are
either skipped or somehow successful where for so many of us it fails.
With that said, I'm quite certain that
On 6/29/05, Dwight A Corrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't
feel like it is my place to formulate the path and since I don't have
a copy of the road map or of the code, I think I'll just keep testing,
and try to help when I things seem broken.
That's unfortunate. The customer should
Hi Paul,
On 6/16/05, Paul Van Noord [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AY of us on this forum are not just disappointed but angry.
Speak for yourself. I haven't given you permission
You're not my father, and I don't need your permission!
See how foolish it is when you quote things out of context?
On 6/7/05, Eddie Castelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all,
I give it an other try. But before installing TB! v3.5.26 with an
AntiSpam Tool I like to consult this ML and see what experience you
have made with either of these Tools mentioned in the Subject line.
Thank you!
Just to save you
On 6/2/05, Tony Boom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've heard of Sexism, ageism and I've even had to take a Government
Authority to court over racism, but Email-Clientism?
It's actually quite common to castigate someone for their choice of
software. Why this is, I really don't know. Software is a
On 6/1/05, George M. Menegakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tuesday, May 31, 2005, 6:44:38 PM, Ming Chang wrote:
Maybe it is confusing but it is the way it should be. It's good that each
Software should never be confusing. Especially something as
fundamental as an MUA. At the end of the day,
On 6/1/05, MAU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I forgot to say... It's also a great opportunity to see how well
threading by Reference+Subject behaves.
Indeed. Despite my insistence, I've been unable to get everyone on
the non-TB mailing lists I'm subscribed to to switch over to TB so my
On 6/1/05, Mary Bull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Vili!
On Wednesday, June 01, 2005, 9:34 PM, you wrote:
This is the problem: Ritlabs should develop the code (that is not OUR
code!) and reflect to customers.
And the point at issue is that I think that RitLabs are getting it
(the
On 5/30/05, Peter Hampf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The unread tab is located under the account/folder window and is ment to be
show only folders that contain unread messages.
It must NOT hide the read messages inside these folders.
I don't want to start a flamewar about this, but I have to
Hi Allie,
Apologies if this comes to the list more than once. I had issues
sending it the first time.
On 5/30/05, Allie Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you use multiple accounts or just one account? Do you have all your
accounts expanded?
Three accounts, all expanded for the most part.
Hi Miguel,
On 5/30/05, MAU [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Kevin,
For most people, I would imagine, the terms all and unread would
be applied to messages, not folders.
They are and are called 'Folder Tabs' (i.e. see View/Folder Tabs or
Specials/Next (Previous) Folder tab) and, as such,
On 5/31/05, Matt Thoene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday, May 30, 2005 @ 6:20:43 PM [-0700], Munango-Keewati wrote:
Are they so interested in context that they want to see read
messages mixed among the unread messages in their Unread tab folders?
I am.
Many people have stated this,
Hi 9Val,
On 5/29/05, 9Val [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All,
We'd like to hear your opinions about most un-obvious things you
ever encountered using TB!
I've reported this one before at https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3565.
Basically, clicking a checkbox should not
20 matches
Mail list logo
