After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 274125 - Filters options to play sounds and run programs are not syncronous
Filters options to play sounds and run programs are not syncronous
Status: RESOLVED NOTABUG
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: general
unspecified
Other All
: Normal minor
: ---
Assigned To: Evolution Triage Team
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-03-27 14:46 UTC by pcoene1
Modified: 2005-08-08 06:51 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description pcoene1 2005-03-27 14:46:07 UTC
Distribution: Fedora Core release 3 (Heidelberg)
Package: Evolution
Priority: Normal
Version: GNOME2.8.0 unspecified
Gnome-Distributor: Red Hat, Inc
Synopsis: Filters options to play sounds and run programs are not syncronous
Bugzilla-Product: Evolution
Bugzilla-Component: Miscellaneous
Bugzilla-Version: unspecified
Description:
Description of Problem:

If you have two filters that play sounds, they will play on top of one
another if they both fire.

Steps to reproduce the problem:
1.  Receive multiple e-mails, where at least 2 of the messages trigger
separate filters that play sounds.
2. 
3. 

Actual Results:
The sounds play on top of one another.

Expected Results:
Each filter would run to completion, including the completion of playing
sounds, before executing the next.


How often does this happen?

Every time two filters with sounds match.

Additional Information:

I tried to use 'run program' to add a delay, but this also returns to
the filter execution before it is complete.


Unknown reporter: pcoene1@rochester.rr.com, changed to bugbuddy-import@ximian.com.
Setting qa contact to the default for this product.
   This bug either had no qa contact or an invalid one.

Comment 1 André Klapper 2005-04-26 12:16:11 UTC
to me, this is pretty unimportant and a WONTFIX candidate. :-)
lowering priority.
Comment 2 André Klapper 2005-06-08 23:37:01 UTC
ok, read a second report about this at the users' mailing list, so confirming 
this bug.
Comment 3 Not Zed 2005-08-08 06:51:34 UTC
this is intentional.