Re: UTF encoding (was: The Bat! 3.51.4 is now available)

Hello Thomas, On Monday, July 18, 2005, at 17:20, you wrote: TF> I see. I tried to include some Thai characters in a previous message TF> (mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]), but they didn't display as TF> such, though. What editor did you use? If your "Language for non unicode applications" is set to somet

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On 7/19/05, Natasha V Pearce wrote: > > I suppose it might be inflammatory to someone who works for RL; although I > > see > > no sign that RL employees are inflamed > > They show remarkable forebearance in the face of such amusingly OTT > accusations. > > > I don't see why those words should i

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On 7/19/05, Thomas Fernandez wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 20:41:28 +0300 GMT (19/07/2005, 00:41 +0700 GMT), > Jay Walker wrote: > > JW> Again, Thomas, you are talking like someone who is at the > JW> beginning of a beta cycle and not the end of a beta cycle. > > Correct. - Get it? Well, I am gla

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hello Jay, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 20:41:28 +0300 GMT (19/07/2005, 00:41 +0700 GMT), Jay Walker wrote: JW> Again, Thomas, you are talking like someone who is at the JW> beginning of a beta cycle and not the end of a beta cycle. Correct. - Get it? Beta testing might just not be for you. I would sugg

Re: 3.51.4 - Strange display behaviour in Sorting Office

Hello Peter, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 20:48:21 +0200 GMT (19/07/2005, 01:48 +0700 GMT), Peter Meyns wrote: TF>> I reported this with 3.0.1.33, but that's so long ago that the mid is TF>> not even in my message base any more. PM> If I had the time, I'd search in my archive. But not today. Anyway, do P

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Jay > I suppose it might be inflammatory to someone who works for RL; although I see > no sign that RL employees are inflamed They show remarkable forebearance in the face of such amusingly OTT accusations. > I don't see why those words should inflame anyone who does not work for RL. I admit to

Re: The Bat! 3.51.4 is now available

Hello 9Val, On Friday, July 15, 2005 at 22:49:29 +0300, you wrote: ... > [-] SMIME : problems with certificates I'm still having the problems with TLS. When I connect to my server wiht TLS TB says: TLS handshake failure. An existing connection was forcibly closed by the remote host. -- Best reg

Re[2]: 3.51.4 - Strange display behaviour in Sorting Office

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 20:48 uur dat jij iets schreef over '3.51.4 - Strange display behaviour in Sorting Office' : Hoi Peter, PM> If I had the time, I'd search in my archive. But not today. Anyway, do PM> you remember the subject? I can't read :p -- groeten, Cees Feel g

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On Monday, July 18, 2005, 12:08:59 AM, Natasha V Pearce wrote: >I'm not intending to speak here for anyone else on > the list Thank you for a very thoughtful reply to a tirade which may not have deserved it. We've seem some pretty wild charges here, but the character assassination has usuall

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On 7/18/05, Thomas Fernandez wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 17:50:07 +0300 GMT (18/07/2005, 21:50 +0700 GMT), > Jay Walker wrote: > > JW> I might be wrong, but it seems to me that RL is now trying to > JW> implement a new degree of unicode support and that RL knew - or > JW> should have known - in a

Re: 3.51.4 - Strange display behaviour in Sorting Office

Hi Thomas, on Mon, 18 Jul 2005 23:35:12 +0700GMT (18.07.2005, 18:35 +0200GMT here), you wrote: TF> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:02:32 +0200 GMT (18/07/2005, 23:02 +0700 GMT), TF> Peter Meyns wrote: IAW>>> I have noticed some strange behaviour when entering conditions that IAW>>> exceed the available

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello Roelof, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:49:23 +0200 GMT (18/07/2005, 23:49 +0700 GMT), Roelof Otten wrote: MM>> did You saw screenshot in report? RO> Yes and I can't reproduce that screenshot. My preview window has a RO> header and a attachment pane, but when select the .eml tab, my RO> embedded me

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hallo Marek, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:31:03 +0200GMT (18-7-2005, 12:31 +0200, where I live), you wrote: >> I can't click on the attachment button in the embedded message, >> because that's supposed to be in the header pane of the embedded >> message and I can't see those either. MM> did You saw sc

Re: Missing characters bug

Hello Mary, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:18:35 -0500 GMT (18/07/2005, 23:18 +0700 GMT), Mary Bull wrote: MB> There are quite a few other people who *do* experience this problem MB> with v. 3.51.1 through 3.51.4. I never doubted that. MB> Did I miss something, that I didn't see you telling them in tho

Re[2]: just a test

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 18:14 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'just a test' : Hoi Alexander, >> VBG ASK> well... you nuts? That's one of the best mobo's around! Came out no. 1 in several tests. -- groeten, Cees Off the keyboard, thru the router, over the bridge, nothing but

Re: 3.51.4 - Strange display behaviour in Sorting Office

Hello Peter, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:02:32 +0200 GMT (18/07/2005, 23:02 +0700 GMT), Peter Meyns wrote: IAW>> I have noticed some strange behaviour when entering conditions that IAW>> exceed the available space in the Sorting Office. When you add a IAW>> condition it appears at the bottom, but try

Re[3]: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

am Montag, 18. Juli 2005 um 12:12 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MM>>> try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will MM>>> have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save MM>>> attachment from this embedded message, after saving, AV error appears. MM> Y

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

Hello Alexander! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 11:07 AM, you wrote: I got overstressed about the 4904 bug. >>> Don't get it now. Why do you call it 4904? >> From the BT issue report number: >> http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 > Haha, thats funny... I can see future conversations here

Re: Missing characters bug [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set (was: F4 quoting...)]

Hello Thomas! On Sunday, July 17, 2005, 11:41 AM, you wrote: MB>> At this point, I haven't seen anyone write that he/she can really MB>> tell for sure what the cause of this unwanted behavior is. > Especially since some people (like myself) are not experiencing it, > even though I use the same T

Re: just a test

Hello Cees & everyone else, on 18-Jul-2005 at 18:11 you (Cees) wrote: >>> just a simple test ASK>> hehe > VBG well... -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Current beta is 3.51.4 | 'Using TBBETA'

Re[2]: just a test

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 18:09 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'just a test' : Hoi Alexander, >> just a simple test ASK> hehe VBG -- groeten, Cees love is like a rose... watch out for the pricks __

Re: just a test

Hello Cees & everyone else, on 18-Jul-2005 at 13:46 you (Cees) wrote: > just a simple test hehe -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) Yes, we have to divide up our time like that, between our politics and our equations. But to me our equations are far more im

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

Hello Mary Bull & everyone else, on 18-Jul-2005 at 15:37 you (Mary Bull) wrote: >>> I got overstressed about the 4904 bug. >> Don't get it now. Why do you call it 4904? > From the BT issue report number: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 Haha, thats funny... I can see future convers

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hello Jay, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 17:50:07 +0300 GMT (18/07/2005, 21:50 +0700 GMT), Jay Walker wrote: JW> I might be wrong, but it seems to me that RL is now trying to JW> implement a new degree of unicode support and that RL knew - or JW> should have known - in advance that users could lose charact

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hello Jay Walker & everyone else, on 18-Jul-2005 at 13:21 you (Jay Walker) wrote: > still worse, alpha testing) a feature like this, I would definitely > have opted out of that cycle. You can opt out any time by going back to 3.0.1.33 (or 3.0.2.10) and unsubscribe from TBBETA. You can completel

Re: 3.51.4 - Strange display behaviour in Sorting Office

Hi Ian, on Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:10:18 +1000GMT (18.07.2005, 10:10 +0200GMT here), you wrote: IAW> I have noticed some strange behaviour when entering conditions that IAW> exceed the available space in the Sorting Office. When you add a IAW> condition it appears at the bottom, but try and change a

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hello Jay Walker & everyone else, on 18-Jul-2005 at 05:33 you (Jay Walker) wrote: > Many times and many people have complained about broken promises in > respect to development of features and direction of testing. It all > seems to be like water off a duck's back. So, what are *you* going to do

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On 7/18/05, Natasha V Pearce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And you believe the following to be non-inflamatory? > > "This announcement goes beyond carelessness and irresponsibility. I > hesitate > to use terms like criminal neglect, but I believe a case could be made in > such > a direction.

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello Marek, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:29:11 +0200 GMT (18/07/2005, 16:29 +0700 GMT), Marek Mikus wrote: MM> try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will MM> have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save MM> attachment from this embedded message, af

Re: UTF encoding (was: The Bat! 3.51.4 is now available)

Hello Edvinas, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:55:26 +0300 GMT (18/07/2005, 13:55 +0700 GMT), Edvinas Matiušaitis wrote: EM> You won't get utf-8 encoding unless use at least one character EM> outside us-ascii charset. There's no need to use utf-8 if all EM> characters fall into us-ascii. By the way, the s

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904

Hi Mary > My monitor is not on a USB connection. It is a ViewSonic 17 in., connected to > a custom-built computer: Pentium 4, 120 GB HD, 512 MB RAM. System properties > says further, "Pentium (R) 4 CPU253GHz 255GHz 512 MB of RAM." Doesn't seem as though we have much in common wrt hardw

Re: Missing characters bug

Hello Mary, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 08:25:03 -0500 GMT (18/07/2005, 20:25 +0700 GMT), Mary Bull wrote: MB> Yes, but when you said it wasn't happening to you, it sounded as if MB> you doubted that it was happening to me--at least, as a result of a MB> bug in TB! MB> So, I wanted to know whether you d

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

Hello Manuel! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 8:05 AM, you wrote: >> I got overstressed about the 4904 bug. > Don't get it now. Why do you call it 4904? From the BT issue report number: http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 >> I never think well when I'm overstressed! Ah, well, but here I am >>

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Jay > Natasha, believe it or not, this is a very serious topic for me. I understand that very clearly. Likewise for me. > I do not want to raise any temperatures. And you believe the following to be non-inflamatory? "This announcement goes beyond carelessness and irresponsibility. I hesita

Re: 3.51.4 - Strange display behaviour in Sorting Office

Hi Ian > I have noticed some strange behaviour when entering conditions that exceed the > available space in the Sorting Office. When you add a condition it appears at > the bottom, but try and change anything and it goes through a weird redisplay > with the condition being edited off the bottom

Re: Missing characters bug [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set (was: F4 quoting...)]

Hello Thomas! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 7:53 AM, you wrote: MB>> How did it show on your screen? > Mary, everything arrived here as it was sent. The bug that you are > reporting is about letters disappearing *before* the mail is sent. > If that is not the case, I have misunderstood the whole thr

Re: The Bat! 3.51.4 is now available

Hello George, Monday, July 18, 2005, 12:01:33 PM, you wrote (possibly edited): > Friday, July 15, 2005, 10:49:29 PM, 9Val wrote: >> [-] Other : Jumping text in header fields should be gone > I don't know if this fix having to do with my problem, but > definitely there is a VERY SERI

Re[3]: just a test

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 14:58 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'just a test' : Hoi Cees, C> thanks, changed it already: removed a typo and added something. and it helps if you change it EVERYWHERE :-) -- groeten, Cees The scientific name for an animal that doesn't either run

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

On Monday, 18 Juli 2005 at 14:53, Mary Bull wrote: > >> With my nose within 2 inches of the screen, I see 2.55 GHz. > > > > LOL, that indeed made me laugh. Not your "faulty" writing of your > > computer's power... > > Resolution is everything! :unreal2: Over here: 1680x1050 on a 17" - nice. ;-)

Re[2]: just a test

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 14:51 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'just a test' : Hoi Charlene, CF>>> Come on, play nice and add a serious line! >> I AM nice... and how can I refuse you anything? ;) >> This one better? CF> You are nice and so is your playing -meanwhile :) hehehe...

Re: Missing characters bug [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set (was: F4 quoting...)]

Hello Mary, On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 15:09:03 -0500 GMT (18/07/2005, 03:09 +0700 GMT), Mary Bull wrote: MB> How did it show on your screen? Mary, everything arrived here as it was sent. The bug that you are reporting is about letters disappearing *before* the mail is sent. If that is not the case, I

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

Hello Manuel! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 7:40 AM, you wrote: >> > ...has to be 2.55 GHz, I think. :D >> With my nose within 2 inches of the screen, I see 2.55 GHz. > LOL, that indeed made me laugh. Not your "faulty" writing of your > computer's power... Resolution is everything! :unreal2: >> T

Re: just a test

Hi Cees, Monday, July 18, 2005 you let us know -at least in parts- : CF>> Come on, play nice and add a serious line! > I AM nice... and how can I refuse you anything? ;) > This one better? You are nice and so is your playing -meanwhile :) What is the TB daily snapshot supposed to do? Are yo

Re[2]: just a test

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 14:37 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'just a test' : Hoi Charlene, CF> Shame on you, still spreading such lies as: >> My 'puter's better than yours! CF> :P CF> Come on, play nice and add a serious line! I AM nice... and how can I refuse you anything? ;) T

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hi Vladimir > Sorry, but link to daily build is slightly different. > Changelog is stored here: www.ritlabs.com/download/the_bat/beta/daily.txt > And build is stored here: www.ritlabs.com/download/the_bat/beta/daily.rar Many thanks for correcting my links. This is extremely useful information.

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hi Liz NVP>> " We are taking course to not-fixed-date releases, which means no " NVP>> deadlines and no rush. Only approved by your responses versions will " be NVP>> named releases. > Unfortunately a few of us did spot that on occasions the rather buggy betas > we thought we were tes

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

On Monday, 18 July 2005 at 13:53, Mary Bull wrote: > > ...has to be 2.55 GHz, I think. :D > With my nose within 2 inches of the screen, I see 2.55 GHz. LOL, that indeed made me laugh. Not your "faulty" writing of your computer's power... > This was not the 4904 character-dropping bug. And I di

Re: just a test

Hi Cees, Monday, July 18, 2005 you let us know -at least in parts- : > I was still testing. it should be here now Shame on you, still spreading such lies as: > My 'puter's better than yours! :P Come on, play nice and add a serious line! -- kind regards Charlene Ferrara mailto:[EMAI

Re: just a test

Hello Cees! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 7:24 AM, you wrote: CF>> Do you use a macro? In your reply it is missing, the comment field is CF>> empty. > I was still testing. it should be here now I do see it! :) -- Best regards, Mary The Bat 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2

Re[2]: just a test

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 14:11 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'just a test' : Hoi Charlene, >> My 'puter's better than yours! CF> No way, mine is better! Nah nah nah :banshee: CF> Do you use a macro? In your reply it is missing, the comment field is CF> empty. I was still

Re: just a test

Hi Cees, Monday, July 18, 2005 you let us know -at least in parts- : > My 'puter's better than yours! No way, mine is better! Do you use a macro? In your reply it is missing, the comment field is empty. -- kind regards Charlene Ferrara mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.51.4 on Wind

Re[4]: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hello Jay, Monday, July 18, 2005, 14:56:44, you wrote: >>So, pardon me, but no one could have guessed from what you wrote that >>this MSI was going to be the beginning of another round of beta >>testing (preliminary to an official release). Rather, the only thing >>you asked us to check was wheth

Re: Re[2]: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On 7/18/05, Maxim Masiutin wrote: > Monday, July 18, 2005, 11:58:56, you wrote: > > >>With an introduction like that - and with the > >>BayesIt problem still unresolved - who would imagine that we would be > >>embarking on an entirely new series of beta (pardon, me, alpha) > >>testing of a very ri

Re: just a test

Het was op maandag 18 juli 2005 om 13:46 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'just a test' : C> just a simple test why doesn't the comment-macro word with tbot? All I see there is: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys -- groeten, Cees Q: What's a Blonde's idea of safe sex? A:

Re: just a test

Hello Cees! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 6:46 AM, you wrote: > just a simple test Cees's tag-line> Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes. And so do some people--like me, for instance! LOL -- Best regards, Mary The Bat 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2

Re[4]: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

7/18/2005 7:43 AM Hi Jay, On 7/18/2005 Jay Walker wrote: JW> I would definitely have opted out of that cycle. Opportunity is knocking! Seize it! -- Take Care, Paul The Bat! v.3.0.2.10 on Win2k SP4-Rollup1 5.0.2195 Current beta is

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

Hello Manuel! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 6:38 AM, you wrote: >> I've double-checked: it's what it says. TB! did, however, swallow a >> space: 255 GHz. I think the space will stay in, this time, since I've >> reverted temporarily to using v. 3.0.2.10. > I'll pay some thousand dollars and will arri

just a test

Het is nu maandag 18 juli 2005, 13:46:20 h : Hoi tbbeta, just a simple test -- groeten, Cees Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes. __ The Bat! 3.51.4 [A12F0392] running on Windows XP 5.1 b

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

On Monday, 18 July 2005 at 13:28 Mary Bull wrote: > I've double-checked: it's what it says. TB! did, however, swallow a > space: 255 GHz. I think the space will stay in, this time, since I've > reverted temporarily to using v. 3.0.2.10. I'll pay some thousand dollars and will arrive by airplane t

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

Hello Alexander! On Monday, July 18, 2005, 5:37 AM, you wrote: >> 255GHz > Unless TB has swallowed a dot somewhere, you have the fastest single CPU > computer on Earth, wow! ;-) Well, that's what Windows said in My Computer/Properties/General. I've double-checked: it's what it says. TB! did, h

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

"Marek Mikus" wrotes on 18/07/2005 at 20:29:11 +1100 subject "Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message" : > Hello, > try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will > have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save > attachment f

Re[2]: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Hello Jay, Monday, July 18, 2005, 11:58:56, you wrote: >>With an introduction like that - and with the >>BayesIt problem still unresolved - who would imagine that we would be >>embarking on an entirely new series of beta (pardon, me, alpha) >>testing of a very risky nature? Do you mean the BayesI

Re: Re[2]: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On 7/18/05, Chris Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you sure you are cut out for testing software? Testing software? Yes. Testing a RitLabs email client? I am not sure any longer... for the reasons stated in my initial message on this thread. The simple fact is that I cannot afford to have

Re: 3.51.4: Big problem with To field in QTs

Hello Peter, M>> the problem is that after including ADNT or ADNL the To field is left M>> _blank_. I know the QTs are 'executed' because the Subject is set correctly. > > Miguel, I have changed the account reply template to what you are using and > created two QTs ADNL and ADNT exactly as shown.

Re: > http://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4904 [was Re: RFC Comments header can't be set]

Hello Mary Bull & everyone else, on 18-Jul-2005 at 01:00 you (Mary Bull) wrote: > 255GHz Unless TB has swallowed a dot somewhere, you have the fastest single CPU computer on Earth, wow! ;-) -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) ___

Re[2]: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello all, Monday, July 18, 2005, Roelof Otten wrote: >>> When I click on the tab, I see the message, but not the headers >>> belonging to that message and neither do I see the attachment pane. >>> Where can I configure that? MM>> click to attachment button in embedded message and change it to pa

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello Marek, > try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will > have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save > attachment from this embedded message, after saving, AV error appears. Seem similar to what I reported in --

Re: Test of return to 3.0.2.10

Hello Mary, > Just a test to see if The Bat! beta version 3.0.2.10 still works as > well as I remember it having done in the past. :) Believe me it does. I always keep it in my TB directory renamed as tb30210.exe and with a shortcut to it in my desktop so I can easily and quickly switch from late

Re: 3.51.4 Changing Colour Group

Hello Roelof, IAW>> When you change the colour group of a message it does not get updated IAW>> until you leave the message. I don't recall it doing this before. > > When you've changed and select it again, it won't show the colour > group either. I suppose that has something to do with the fact t

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hallo Marek, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:00:23 +0200GMT (18-7-2005, 12:00 +0200, where I live), you wrote: MM>>> do not open 1.EML in viewer, but click to tab, please check BT, I have MM>>> added screenshots. Thanks >> When I click on the tab, I see the message, but not the headers >> belonging to th

Re: Test of return to 3.0.2.10

Hello Bill! On Sunday, July 17, 2005, 8:00 PM, you wrote: > However the 3.0.2.10 beta exe fails here with the MS box > telling me the application must close :-) I am so sorry. > Anyone else having this problem? It was so nice to have > this old reliable beta available. It is one of the strang

Re[2]: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

Good day beta list members, Monday, July 18, 2005, 9:58:56 AM, you wrote: > On 7/18/05, Natasha V Pearce wrote: >> been taken out of context, but if you feel I've misquoted you and/or >> quoted >> them in a misleading or otherwise inappropriate manner, please feel free >> to >> send d

Re[2]: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello all, Monday, July 18, 2005, Melanie wrote: MM>> try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will MM>> have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save MM>> attachment from this embedded message, after saving, AV error appears. > Cannot confirm. >

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello Marek, am Montag, 18. Juli 2005 um 11:29 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: MM> try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will MM> have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save MM> attachment from this embedded message, after saving, AV error appears

Re: 3.51.4: Big problem with To field in QTs

Hello MAU, > The replies are created and put in the Outbox, the problem is that after > including ADNT or ADNL the To field is left _blank_. I know the QTs are > 'executed' because the Subject is set correctly. I have just reported this in BT: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=4933 -- Bes

Re[2]: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello all, Monday, July 18, 2005, Roelof Otten wrote: MM>> do not open 1.EML in viewer, but click to tab, please check BT, I have MM>> added screenshots. Thanks > When I click on the tab, I see the message, but not the headers > belonging to that message and neither do I see the attachment pane.

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hallo Marek, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:44:05 +0200GMT (18-7-2005, 11:44 +0200, where I live), you wrote: MM> do not open 1.EML in viewer, but click to tab, please check BT, I have MM> added screenshots. Thanks When I click on the tab, I see the message, but not the headers belonging to that message

3.51.4: Big problem with To field in QTs

Hello all, I have a manual Read filter to process web queries received. What the filter does is move the message to another folder and create an automatic reply using the following template: %FROM=""%FROM="%OFROMNAME <%OFROMADDR>"%- %SUBJECT="Add lead"%- %REPLYTO=""%REPLYTO="%OFROMNAME <%OFROMADD

Re[2]: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello all, Monday, July 18, 2005, Roelof Otten wrote: MM>> try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will MM>> have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save MM>> attachment from this embedded message, after saving, AV error appears. > Can't confirm

Disabling "Editing shortcuts" and "Configuring System Hot Keys" in Network&Administration doesn't work

Hello, it is possible to disable some features to accounts with "User" rights, options "Editing shortcuts" and "Configuring System Hot Keys" stopped working in 3.5, first because implementing customiser with shortcuts editing, second maybe before, do not know. I have added reports for them: https:

Re: Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hallo Marek, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:29:11 +0200GMT (18-7-2005, 11:29 +0200, where I live), you wrote: MM> try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will MM> have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save MM> attachment from this embedded message, af

Re: 3.51.4 Changing Colour Group

Hallo Ian, On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:12:43 +1000GMT (18-7-2005, 10:12 +0200, where I live), you wrote: IAW> When you change the colour group of a message it does not get updated IAW> until you leave the message. I don't recall it doing this before. When you've changed and select it again, it won't

Access Violation after saving attachment from embedded message

Hello, try to forward message with attachment and save it to Outbox, You will have 1.EML attachment included. Click to tab "1.EML" and try to save attachment from this embedded message, after saving, AV error appears. please check and confirm following report: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.ph

Re: 3.51, Communication, and the Ethics of Beta Testing

On 7/18/05, Natasha V Pearce wrote: > been taken out of context, but if you feel I've misquoted you and/or > quoted > them in a misleading or otherwise inappropriate manner, please feel free > to > send down the fire-breathing trout of vengeance to toast me in the pit > of > etern