Re: I have returned
Hi, The original quoted text below was written on 19/01/2005 22:33 my local time; I tried Thunderbird for about two months. I am back to the bat. Great program. I must confess, I've been using Thunderbird for about 2-3 months now. The main reason for this is that I personally find IMAP support better in Thunderbird right now than in TB! I understand that IMAP is being worked on for this beta, but until I can carry out the basics such as reading mail, I'm happy using Thunderbird. Obviously I miss lots of features within TB!, especially templates and certain aspects of filtering, but I'm able to carry out server side filtering which has cushioned the blow somewhat. But fingers crossed, IMAP improves soon :-) -- Chris Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
SOT: Xray or Hamster for X-Received-By header
Hello tbudl, This is only slightly OT, because it wouldn't be if TB had the option to add headers to incoming mails. And it has to do with the filtering system. I want to add an X-Received-By header to each mail received, showing the account it come in on for some filtering action. (For those who have been following my threads on TBUDL and TBBETA: Yes, it's the same ongoing saga.) My question: Should I look at Xray or Hamster to achieve that task? -- TIA, Thomas. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SOT: Xray or Hamster for X-Received-By header
ON Thursday, January 20, 2005, 4:29:20 PM, you wrote: TF My question: Should I look at Xray or Hamster to achieve that task? Hi Thomas, It depends. If you want to add this header on the basis of the e-mail address it has been send to, then yes you could use both. If you want to filter something in TB! and then add the header Xray can only do this when you send the mail out. As a result you can not use the new header to filter on. Here is a trick I use. On the basis of the results of he filtering action of TB! I add a %comment: header with a value. On sending the email I can make the actions of Xray dependent of the value I give the comment header and even have Xray remove this header when done :-) I hope this helps. -- Best regards, Gerard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Things That Sound Dirty At Golf But Aren't: Nice stroke, but your follow through has a lot to be desired Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Mail created date time
Hi all, I've a question regarding the 'Created Date Time' within emails. I receive periodic emails from one of my bank accounts and when they come through, there is no created date or time in them. I sort my mail by created date, but because these mails don't have a created date, they're not sorted correctly. I've approached the organisation in question and they assure me that the date is included in all their outgoing mail. So why do I not receive it and why is it only from this one location? I've attached a screen print (it's in Thunderbird, but it's the same with TB!) for people to see. I've tried comparing headers and all I can see that is different, is after the 'Subject' header, there is no 'Date' header. Could this be what is missing? -- Chris Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Hi Roman Katzer, On 19/01/2005 11:13 PM, you wrote: I'm curious. What do you see as the most important advantages and disadvantages of both clients? What do you like most and least about both? My sentiments are based on my being a full IMAP user: ThunderBird is simpler so more attention is paid to simple functionality. This is very good since though we may do sophisticated things, we spend most of our time doing the simple things which include reading and replying to mail. ThunderBird does this very well. It's very efficient at retrieving mail as an IMAP client and it's highly reliable at the task. Keyboard navigation is nice and easy. I hit 'n' to move to the next unread message. It's very awkward leaving the letter 'n' to hit 'CTRL+]'. Ritlabs made a colossal error sacrificing all single keyboard shortcuts in the name of quick-searching which could have been preserved, but first invoked by a keyboard shortcut. Afterall, we spend far more time moving from message to message, rather than quick searching our messages. ThunderBird's model seems to revolve around a solidly working and protected foundation which is enhanced via the addition of extensions. TB! is highly functional and I do admire it for this reason. I use a lot of this functionality, so it's the client that I prefer using, though not without frustration. From an IMAP standpoint, it's reliable for me, though problematic. I can't use it at work since it's not efficient enough in low bandwidth environments. These issues are fundamental. They comprise the groundwork and need to be addressed. In all fairness, I must admit that both applications histories are different in that TB!'s IMAP support is relatively young while ThunderBird was built as an IMAP client. As a result with TB!, we end up with a major piece of fundamental functionality in evolution amidst quite advanced and well developed functionality. It certainly amplifies the reality that without a good base, the advanced stuff becomes useless. It's the basic functionality that keeps that basic and frequent user happy without concern for the more advanced features. It's that basic functionality that makes the user interested in the advanced functionality, not too frustrated and wondering why a client with such great advanced functionality, has such fundamental problems. The fundamental issues also concern the editors, the general interface, and appearance. -- Cheers, -= Allie =- Imagination is more important than knowledge - Einstein Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Hi Chris Weaven, On 20/01/2005 04:29 AM, you wrote: Obviously I miss lots of features within TB!, especially templates and certain aspects of filtering, but I'm able to carry out server side filtering which has cushioned the blow somewhat. I forgot about filtering. How could I?! :) The basic working of ThunderBirds filtering is hands down better. It just works. I filter with ThunderBird at work, low bandwidth and all. ThunderBird's filter matching and actions options aren't as numerous as with TB!. However, ThunderBird's works while TB!'s is problematic and often doesn't work. As a result despite all of TB!'s fancy filtering abilities, I don't use it and instead, do most filtering server side. Again, filtering, a fundamental task is shaky for TB! IMAP, while it works for ThunderBird. The worrying thing about this is that there's a developmental reason for it in that TB!'s current design makes the ThunderBird method not easily implementable. So the recurring theme is solidity on the ground vs advanced functionality which becomes useful only with a firm footing on a reliable and solid ground. -- Cheers, -= Allie =- Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Mail created date time
Hello Chris, On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:11:23 + GMT (20/01/2005, 23:11 +0700 GMT), Chris Weaven wrote: CW I've approached the organisation in question and they assure me that the CW date is included in all their outgoing mail. CW So why do I not receive it and why is it only from this one location? I can imagine that their date stamp is not according to the RFC. CW I've attached a screen print (it's in Thunderbird, but it's the same CW with TB!) for people to see. Didn't come through, obviously. But what I would be more interested in is the headers of that message rather than a screenshot. Especially the Date header. CW I've tried comparing headers and all I can see that is different, is CW after the 'Subject' header, there is no 'Date' header. Could this be CW what is missing? Args. No Date header? Send the headers back to them for examination. I cannot fathom a server en route would strip a Date header, though. Sounds weird. -- Cheers, Thomas. 2000 jaehriges Bad Goegging wird 70 Jahre alt. * Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SOT: Xray or Hamster for X-Received-By header
Hello Gerard, On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:01:37 +0100 GMT (20/01/2005, 23:01 +0700 GMT), Gerard wrote: TF My question: Should I look at Xray or Hamster to achieve that task? G It depends. If you want to add this header on the basis of the e-mail address it G has been send to, then yes you could use both. Thanks. Which one do you think is easier to set up? All I want to do is add one header. G If you want to filter something in TB! and then add the header No, add the header first, import to TB, then filter on that header. G Here is a trick I use. G On the basis of the results of he filtering action of TB! I add a %comment: G header with a value. Problem is, TB uses Common filters before it touches the Account filters. G On sending the email I can make the actions of Xray dependent of the value I G give the comment header and even have Xray remove this header when done :-) I don't need that. I use TB macros. ;-) G I hope this helps. Thanks, yes. -- Cheers, Thomas. Wochenende wird schoen. Unwetter und Waldbraende. * Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Chris Weaven said the following on 01/20/2005 10:52: If I were to be totally honest here, the only thing I'm really missing from TB! is templates. Working with Thunderbird and IMAP with server side filtering for a few months now has made me realise that I'm not as reliant on TB! as I thought I was. I'm using TBird's filtering, and while there are things I miss about TB!'s more advanced filtering, at least TBird's filtering works smoothly with IMAP, which last I tried TB!, the filtering with IMAP was very quirky and unreliable. So I would agree with missing templates, and also add that I very much miss MicroEd. Once IMAP works well, then I'm sure TB! will be my client of choice, but until then, I'm more than happy with Thunderbird. As Allie puts it so well, 'it works'. Ditto. Although IMAP will have to work as well or better than TBird in every respect before I'll go back. If basic IMAP functionality is inferior, it is not worth paying for even for templates/editor/etc. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Mail created date time
Hi Thomas, The original quoted text below was written on 20/01/2005 16:56 my local time; I can imagine that their date stamp is not according to the RFC. As I'm sure most of their mail is system generated, I suspect something is missing somewhere. Didn't come through, obviously. But what I would be more interested in is the headers of that message rather than a screenshot. Especially the Date header. I forgot that TBUDL doesn't allow any attachments. If I get time tonight when I get home, I'll put some up on the internet and post the link. Args. No Date header? Send the headers back to them for examination. I cannot fathom a server en route would strip a Date header, though. Sounds weird. I've already written to them twice including a screen print. They said they couldn't open the attachment (.png) for security reasons, so I have to write to them and print out a copy of the screen print :-( Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Allie, On 20-01-2005 17:24, you [A] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: A Keyboard navigation is nice and easy. I hit 'n' to move to the next A unread message. It's very awkward leaving the letter 'n' to hit A 'CTRL+]'. Do as I do. Use PowerPro to get all the different keyboard shortcuts to respond to '. A Ritlabs made a colossal error sacrificing all single keyboard A shortcuts in the name of quick-searching which could have been A preserved, but first invoked by a keyboard shortcut. Exactly. Like in Opera - , or . A In all fairness, I must admit that both applications histories are A different in that TB!'s IMAP support is relatively young while A ThunderBird was built as an IMAP client. Yes. But it should be pretty easy for RitLabs to look at the source for Thunderbird (it being open) and pore over what _they_ have done to get it all to work as well (?) as it does. :) -- greeting Best regards /greeting author Peter Fjelsten /author thebat version 3.0.1.33 Pro /thebat version env. ~18 POP3, 1 IMAP (MailMax 5.5) 1 IMAP (Exchange 6.5), 150K msgs. /env. os Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 /os Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Mail created date time
Hi all, The original quoted text below was written on 20/01/2005 17:16 my local time; Apologies about the missing cut marks. I didn't notice to start with, but when I change identities in Thunderbird, it removes it!? Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html Hopefully this one has worked :-) -- Chris Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Mail created date time
Hello Chris, Thursday, January 20, 2005, 12:16:31 PM, you wrote and sent the following: I've already written to them twice including a screen print. They said they couldn't open the attachment (.png) for security reasons, so I have to write to them and print out a copy of the screen print :-( View / RFC822 Headers isn't enough? -- Andrew Using The Bat! 3.0.1.33 On Windows XP, 5.1 Build: 2600 I like kids, but I don't think I could eat a whole one. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Mail created date time
Hi Chris, On Thursday, January 20, 2005 17:16 our local time, Chris Weaven [CW] wrote; Didn't come through, obviously. But what I would be more interested in is the headers of that message rather than a screenshot. Especially the Date header. CW I forgot that TBUDL doesn't allow any attachments. If I get time tonight CW when I get home, I'll put some up on the internet and post the link. Ok, as promised, links to sample screen prints: http://www.w-world.net/forum_images/headers.png http://www.w-world.net/forum_images/dates.png *All* the other mail I have, have a 'Date' header directly under the subject line, whereas the messages in question don't. What do people think? -- Regards, Chris Created using The Bat! v3.0.2.8 OS of Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Cleaning up SPAM with Bayes Filter Plugin v2.0.1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Re: I have returned
Peter Fjelsten [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 2005-Jan-20 at Thu PM 12:17:51 EST, wrote: Yes. But it should be pretty easy for RitLabs to look at the source for Thunderbird (it being open) and pore over what _they_ have done to get it all to work as well (?) as it does. :) It may be possible for Rit Labs to use some of the code in The Bat! according to section 3.7 of the Mozilla Public License: You may create a Larger Work by combining Covered Code with other code not governed by the terms of this License and distribute the Larger Work as a single product. In such a case, You must make sure the requirements of this License are fulfilled for the Covered Code. However, section 3.2 clearly states: Any Modification which You create or to which You contribute must be made available in Source Code form under the terms of this License either on the same media as an Executable version or via an accepted Electronic Distribution Mechanism to anyone to whom you made an Executable version available; and if made available via Electronic Distribution Mechanism, must remain available for at least twelve (12) months after the date it initially became available, or at least six (6) months after a subsequent version of that particular Modification has been made available to such recipients. You are responsible for ensuring that the Source Code version remains available even if the Electronic Distribution Mechanism is maintained by a third party. From what I understand (I am not a lawyer), extracting some of the code and using it is another application would be a modification, so the source of that file, at least, would need to be released. Also, Thunderbird is written in C++; The Bat! is written in Delphi. Finally, most developers consider it either bad taste or a violation of open-source licenses to look at code and then re-implement the same functionality. -- Chris Warrington (using WebMail) -- Chris Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SOT: Xray or Hamster for X-Received-By header
ON Thursday, January 20, 2005, 5:59:32 PM, you wrote: TF Thanks. Which one do you think is easier to set up? All I want to do TF is add one header. Hi Thomas, I have not tried Hamster myself but Xray is brilliantly easy to use. Once you have set it up between TB! and the outside world creating filters and actions is easy. You have a choice of placing Xray only in the email stream with SMTP (incoming) or POP3 (outgoing) or both. It doesn't work with and Imap setup. -- Best regards, Gerard -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- You make a lot of money in this game. Just ask my ex-wives. Both of them are so rich that neither of their husbands' work. Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Chris, On 20-01-2005 20:30, you [C] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: C Finally, most developers consider it either bad taste or a violation C of open-source licenses to look at code and then re-implement the C same functionality. Maybe they could have a small sneak peek... :) -- greeting Best regards /greeting author Peter Fjelsten /author thebat version 3.0.1.33 Pro /thebat version env. ~18 POP3, 1 IMAP (MailMax 5.5) 1 IMAP (Exchange 6.5), 175K msgs. /env. os Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 /os Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Mail created date time
Hello Chris, Thursday, January 20, 2005, 2:24:58 PM, you wrote and sent the following: What do people think? 1) They are generating wrong headers... but maybe not since I think 2 is more likely. 2) Are you accidentally parsing out headers from these particular emails with your mail server? Some spam or header rule? -- Andrew Using The Bat! 3.0.1.33 On Windows XP, 5.1 Build: 2600 He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife. --Douglas Adams Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: Mail created date time
Hi Andrew, On Thursday, January 20, 2005 15:08 your local time, which was 20:08 my local time, Andrew Andrew [A] wrote; A 2) Are you accidentally parsing out headers from these particular A emails with your mail server? Some spam or header rule? I do have SPAM rules, but I've only been running the mail server for about 1 month now. Some of these messages date back nearly 12 months. -- Regards, Chris Created using The Bat! v3.0.2.8 OS of Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Cleaning up SPAM with Bayes Filter Plugin v2.0.1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Mail created date time
Hello Chris, Thursday, January 20, 2005, 10:20:55 AM, you wrote: C Hopefully this one has worked :-) You got it... Thanks. -- __ TBUDL/BETA/DEV/TECH Lists Moderator / PGP 0x6C0AB16B ( ) ( ___)(_ _)( ___) TBUDP Wiki Site: http://www.PCWize.com/thebat/tbudp )(__ )__) _)(_ )__) Roguemoticons: http://PCWize.com/thebat ()()()(__)PCWSmileys: http://PCWize.com/thebat/pcwsmileys.php Tagline of the day: Sponges grow in the ocean ... that *kills* me. I wonder how much deeper the oceans would be if that didn't happen. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Hi Peter Fjelsten, On 20/01/2005 12:17 PM, you wrote: Do as I do. Use PowerPro to get all the different keyboard shortcuts to respond to '. That works well until I wish to really do a quick search and instead of 'n' appearing as it should in the quick search string entry field, I keep going to the next message. Same for other single key shortcuts I wish to define using PowerPro. I do use PowerPro for other things, especially text editing with the TB! editor. However, despite using it for periods for navigation, I do go back to not using them. I end up not being able to tolerate the macro keys conflicting with other things I may wish to do. A In all fairness, I must admit that both applications histories are A different in that TB!'s IMAP support is relatively young while A ThunderBird was built as an IMAP client. Yes. But it should be pretty easy for RitLabs to look at the source for Thunderbird (it being open) and pore over what _they_ have done to get it all to work as well (?) as it does. :) They could do this provided that the working is the same. Otherwise they can only borrow concepts which they may already know but are faced with the problem of implementation within the current design. -- Cheers, -= Allie =- In the land of the witless, the halfwit is king. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Allie, On 20-01-2005 22:09, you [A] wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Do as I do. Use PowerPro to get all the different keyboard shortcuts to respond to '. A That works well until I wish to really do a quick search and instead of A 'n' appearing as it should in the quick search string entry field, I A keep going to the next message. Same for other single key shortcuts I A wish to define using PowerPro. I think you may misunderstand (I must have been unclear). I have set the key ' to move to the next unread message (PowerPro translates this to the different keystrokes I have set in TB!). This does not interfere with quick search. -- greeting Best regards /greeting author Peter Fjelsten /author thebat version 3.0.1.33 Pro /thebat version env. ~18 POP3, 1 IMAP (MailMax 5.5) 1 IMAP (Exchange 6.5), 175K msgs. /env. os Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 /os Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
automatically archiving the Inbox
Hello, I have a read messages filter that moves messages in my Inbox that are more than 60 days old to an archive folder. The filter is active but it only works when I manually re-filter my Inbox. Is there some way to make this filter run automatically? I know it is recommended to keep the size of the Inbox small. Is it also recommended to keep the Sent Mail folder small? -- Regards, Mike F Mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
On Thursday, January 20, 2005 at 5:14:52 PM [GMT -0500], Peter Fjelsten wrote: I think you may misunderstand (I must have been unclear). I have set the key ' to move to the next unread message (PowerPro translates this to the different keystrokes I have set in TB!). This does not interfere with quick search. Good idea, though the essence of my post wasn't in the effort to seek a work around. :) Thanks though. -- Cheers, -= Allie =- . Half of the people in the world are below average. «·» IMAP Client: The Bat! v3.0.2.5 IMAP Server: MDaemon Pro · OS: Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 2) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SOT: Xray or Hamster for X-Received-By header
Hello Gerard, On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:27:56 +0100 GMT (21/01/2005, 02:27 +0700 GMT), Gerard wrote: G I have not tried Hamster myself but Xray is brilliantly easy to use. I will try Xray first, because Hamster is a fully-grown mail server, I understand. That would be an overkill. G Once you have set it up between TB! and the outside world creating filters and G actions is easy. You have a choice of placing Xray only in the email stream with G SMTP (incoming) or POP3 (outgoing) or both. It doesn't work with and Imap setup. I need it only for incoming (POP3) mails, it needs to add only one header for each of the 8 accounts. I do not use IMAP. Will keep you informed. -- Cheers, Thomas. Eat a live toad in the morning and nothing worse will happen to you for the rest of the day. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: automatically archiving the Inbox
Hello Mike, On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:52:14 -0500 GMT (21/01/2005, 06:52 +0700 GMT), Mike F wrote: MF I have a read messages filter that moves messages in my Inbox that MF are more than 60 days old to an archive folder. The filter is active MF but it only works when I manually re-filter my Inbox. Is there some MF way to make this filter run automatically? No, TB will filter automatically only on messages that are received in the Inbox via POP or IMAP. there may be a command-line paramter in the meantime though, I didn't check. MF I know it is recommended to keep the size of the Inbox small. Is MF it also recommended to keep the Sent Mail folder small? Yes. What both folders have in common is that they are high-traffic folders. Mails come into the Inbox will will then be moved somewhere else by Incoming filters; sent messages will go to the Sent folder and then be moved by Outgoing filters. -- Cheers, Thomas. The destruction of the Berlin wall marked history's first feminine revolution: There was no violence and when it ended everybody went shopping. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Default template for send mail from other applications via MAPI?
Hi On Sunday 16 January 2005 at 3:32:30 AM, in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Thomas Fernandez wrote: Hello MFPA, On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:00:51 + GMT (16/01/2005, 00:00 +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: R If i enter the adressee, nothing changes - the template for R the adress book entry i want to send to isn't used. M It is here, once you put the cursor into the message body (by M clicking or by tabbing down). Nice to hear. - When did they fix that? Dunno but I'm using v3.0.1.33 -- Best regards, MFPAmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: automatically archiving the Inbox
Mike F @ 2005-Jan-20 6:52:14 PM automatically archiving the Inbox mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I have a read messages filter that moves messages in my Inbox that are more than 60 days old to an archive folder. The filter is active but it only works when I manually re-filter my Inbox. Is there some way to make this filter run automatically? Yes, but it does not use a filter. Right-click on Inbox and go to properties. Check the box by Keep messages in base for (days) and enter 60. Then, open your account properties. Go to Deletion. Under Alternate Deletion, select Move to the specified folder. Also check Use alternative deletion method for purging folders. Now, every time you purge your folders, the messages will be moved. Under Options - Preferences, I configured The Bat! to automatically purge folders on exit. Folders other than the Inbox can also be configured this way. However, they have their own Deletion tab in their properties. -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Accessing a POP3 mailbox. Today's Oxymoron: Terribly pleased pgpQWEa9BprP5.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: automatically archiving the Inbox
Chris, Thursday, January 20, 2005, 9:11:46 PM, you wrote: C Right-click on Inbox and go to properties. Check the box by Keep C messages in base for (days) and enter 60. Then, open your account C properties. Go to Deletion. Under Alternate Deletion, select C Move to the specified folder. Also check Use alternative C deletion method for purging folders. C Now, every time you purge your folders, the messages will be moved. Under Options - Preferences, I configured The Bat! to automatically C purge folders on exit. Thanks, I would have never guessed this behavior in a million years. However, does this mean that if I purge a folder other than my Inbox, its messages will go to the same folder I am using for my Inbox archive? I am asking because I don't see anything in Account Properties/Deletion that specifies that this behavior is for Inbox only. -- Regards, Mike F Mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: automatically archiving the Inbox
Mike F @ 2005-Jan-20 9:39:45 PM automatically archiving the Inbox mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] However, does this mean that if I purge a folder other than my Inbox, its messages will go to the same folder I am using for my Inbox archive? I am asking because I don't see anything in Account Properties/Deletion that specifies that this behavior is for Inbox only. Yes. But you can configure every other folder individually to override the account wide settings. I was thinks of putting in a feature request regarding this. The deletion settings under the account properties would be the default for every folder. However, each folder (including the Inbox) could have its own settings. At the top of the tab within the folder's properties, there could be a checkbox that says something along the lines of Define folder-specific settings that would enable custom deletion settings for that folder. This interface would be similar to setting up address book templates. Thoughts? -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Accessing a POP3 mailbox. Be careful of reading health books, you might die of a misprint. pgpJA1UVGb7XK.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: automatically archiving the Inbox
Chris, Thursday, January 20, 2005, 10:20:00 PM, you wrote: C Yes. But you can configure every other folder individually to C override the account wide settings. In that case, I am going to stick with manual filtering. Setting up all of those overrides is too much work for me. Thanks Chris for explaining all of this. C I was thinks of putting in a feature request regarding this. The C deletion settings under the account properties would be the default C for every folder. However, each folder (including the Inbox) could C have its own settings. At the top of the tab within the folder's C properties, there could be a checkbox that says something along the C lines of Define folder-specific settings that would enable custom C deletion settings for that folder. This interface would be similar to C setting up address book templates. C Thoughts? I think hooking archive functionality into alternative deletion and purging is very cryptic. I think there should be a clearly named Archive property at the folder level. There could also be an Archive property at the account level but I wouldn't have any use for it. -- Regards, Mike F Mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: automatically archiving the Inbox
On Fri 21 January 2005, 14:20:00 +1000, Chris wrote: Yes. But you can configure every other folder individually to override the account wide settings. An alternative approach would be to create a new folder, called say Inbox2, and automatically move all received emails from Inbox to Inbox2. This would effectively bypass Inbox and make Inbox2 your real inbox. Then set up the purging after 60 days and apply folder specific deletion settings to Inbox2. I was thinks of putting in a feature request regarding this. The deletion settings under the account properties would be the default for every folder. However, each folder (including the Inbox) could have its own settings. At the top of the tab within the folder's properties, there could be a checkbox that says something along the lines of Define folder-specific settings that would enable custom deletion settings for that folder. This interface would be similar to setting up address book templates. Thoughts? I think it is a good idea. -- Robin Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
