Re: [Evolution] all of my archived emails dissapeared



On Fri, 2018-07-20 at 01:06 +0200, Ángel wrote:
On 2018-07-19 at 18:49 +0100, Richard Bown wrote:
On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 12:32 -0500, Christopher Marlow wrote:
I would sort the mail lists by their addresses into
different folders so I would know what list i'm reading / talking
back to. 

Folders like:
HAM_RADIO_LIST_A
HAM_RADIO_LIST_B

then filter HamRadioListA HamRadio com then sort into
HAM_RADIO_LIST_A
folder.


Hiya
 But its not that simple when some can post to several mailing
lists
and some crosspost between lists.

This _shouldn't_ be a problem by itself.

You cant filter on list as not all the lists are easily identified
as
such.

I would consider a bug in the list. However, you could still use a
more
complex condition to filter it (check the recipient addresses, or
even
the server that sent it).

I too, like keeping mails to different lists/groups on separated
folders. As each list should be sending you a copy, filtering on list
would move each one to its folder.

However, what breaks it are the case where the recipient list has
been
"conveniently" unified, either by the mail provider (eg. Gmail) or a
list server shared by both lists (eg. Exchange).
There is a variant in the case that the mail server sees that you are
explicitly listed as a recipient and skips sending you the list
email,
which is the mailman default, but that can be disabled by the user.

The problem in such case is that you have *one* email that needs to
be
filed into *two* folders, because you should have received it
*twice*,
but you didn't. ☹


Filters are boolean , so you cant use "maybe"

How would that help? If a human secretary asked you "Where do I file
this bill?" and you reply with "Maybe on <a dozen of places>", so it
essentially ends up saved into a random one, how do you expect to
find
it later?



Perhaps one day we will have AI filters

That will mainly be a marketing label, not as useful as the name
makes
it look like

then you could filter on the perceived IQ of the poster, then you
can filter on dumb, dumber and
dumber :-), 

but this is actually a funny idea :)


Cheers

Hi 
I'm glad you were able to see it was a humorous statement

Its not a bug , so nothing to be filed.
Comparing a list of about 50 e-mail addresses against several mailing lists take time, especially as it has 
to be batched.
The filters I have catch about 80% of instances, and only becomes a problem if I read mail on my phone first, 
so it becomes marked as read.
Which means in Evo its not highlited, hence then having to search to find where it went.
Nothing to do with lazyness or idleness or not being able to write a filter, its a case of keeping process 
time and cpu loading low.
A habit I've got into running ARM SBCs
I hope that clarifies the case

-- 
 Best wishes /73 
 Richard Bown
 
 Email : richard g8jvm com

 HTTP  :  http://www.g8jvm.com
 
 ######################################################################

 Ham Call: G8JVM . QRV: 50-432 MHz + Microwave 
 Maidenhead QRA: IO82SP38, LAT. 52 39.720' N LONG. 2 28.171 W
 QRV 6mtrs 200W, 4mtrs 150W, 2mtrs 300W, 70cms 200W, 
 Microwave 1296MHz 140W, 2320MHz 100W & 10368MHz 5W
 OS: Linux Mint 19 x86_64 Tara, on a Dell Inspiron N5030 laptop
 ######################################################################



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]