Hi
On Saturday 28 May 2005 at 4:28:30 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], MAU wrote:
Do the Statistics for this filter show that it is being tested?
Where do you view those statistics, please?
--
Best regards,
MFPA
What is real? How do you define real?
Using The
Hello MFPA,
Where do you view those statistics, please?
That's new to the latest release (an Statistics tab in filters), not
available in v3.0.1.33 you are using.
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain)
Using The Bat! v3.5.21
Hi
On Sunday 29 May 2005 at 4:41:23 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], MAU wrote:
That's new to the latest release (an Statistics tab in filters), not
available in v3.0.1.33 you are using.
That explains why I can't find it ;-)
--
Best regards,
MFPA
Don't
I just upgraded to 3.5 from 3.0, and my filters don't seem to work the
way they used to. Filters that checked the recipient fields for a
specific address and moved the message to a specific folder no longer
seem to work; instead the messages are falling into a catch-all filter
at the end of the
Hello Anthony,
Filters that checked the recipient fields for a specific address and
moved the message to a specific folder no longer seem to work;
Can you copy (Ctrl+C) one of these filters and paste it (Ctrl+V) in a
message here so we can take a look?
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El
MAU writes:
Can you copy (Ctrl+C) one of these filters and paste it (Ctrl+V) in a
message here so we can take a look?
TB! Message Filter
beginFilter
UID: [2D75BAD5.01C4C06A.1734AE5E.04E421D8]
Name: The\20Bat
Filter: {\0D\0A\20`5`15`^Reply-to:[EMAIL
Hello Anthony,
Filter:
{\0D\0A\20`5`15`^Reply-to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/5C.dutaint/5C.com\0D\0A}
This, in a more readable form is:
Header matches all as RegExp ^Reply-to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I seem to recall there were some issues with RegExp in latest
betas/releases. In any case, I would suggest
MAU writes:
Filter:
{\0D\0A\20`5`15`^Reply-to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/5C.dutaint/5C.com\0D\0A}
This, in a more readable form is:
Header matches all as RegExp ^Reply-to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I seem to recall there were some issues with RegExp in latest
betas/releases. In any case, I would suggest
Hello Anthony,
I just tried it: same result. The filter looks like this now:
TB! Message Filter
beginFilter
UID: [2D75BAD5.01C4C06A.1734AE5E.04E421D8]
Name: The\20Bat
Filter: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MoveMessage folder
MAU writes:
Is your new filter active? It wasn't you you copied it.
It is now. In fact, it fires, but the message is not moved. I added an
action to change the color of the subject line, and it works, but the
message is not being moved. This is the current filter:
TB! Message Filter
Apparently it has something to do with arranging filters in a hierarchy.
Something has changed in the code. Can anyone tell me exactly what
changed, or should I just roll dice to figure it out?
--
Anthony
__
Using The Bat! v3.5 on Windows XP 5.1
Hello Anthony,
MoveMessage folder
\5C\5C\5CLocal\5CIncoming\20mail\20by\20mailing\20list\5CThe\20Bat
Thos only strange thing I see is in your move action. The folder patch
starts with \\\ (3 of them) and I see that in my filters all of them
start with just two (\\). Can you try to edit this
Hello Anthony,
Apparently it has something to do with arranging filters in a hierarchy.
Yes, of course. If a filter above the one in question is triggering and
is not set to Continue processing, the filter in question will not even
be tested.
Something has changed in the code. Can anyone
MAU writes:
Thos only strange thing I see is in your move action. The folder patch
starts with \\\ (3 of them) and I see that in my filters all of them
start with just two (\\). Can you try to edit this action and select the
folder again to see if it does make any difference?
All of the move
MAU writes:
Yes, of course. If a filter above the one in question is triggering and
is not set to Continue processing, the filter in question will not even
be tested.
But the filter _was_ being tested, and it _did_ trigger, because when I
put a change color action in the filter, it was
Hello Anthony,
Clearly, the failure is related to the fact that these filters are
subordinate to another filter. Something that worked before in this
logic has been broken, and now it doesn't work. I suggest that the code
in that area be examined.
OK, you should have mentioned from start
MAU writes:
OK, you should have mentioned from start that you were talking about
sub-filters.
At the beginning I had no particular reason to suspect the subfilter
structure, and therefore no reason to mention it.
Are you perhaps also talking about Common filters and
sub-filters?
Yes, I use
17 matches
Mail list logo
