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 748812 - Provide methods to search and sort filters
Provide methods to search and sort filters
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
3.12.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-05-02 21:57 UTC by Jonathan Ryshpan
Modified: 2021-05-19 11:45 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Jonathan Ryshpan 2015-05-02 21:57:33 UTC
P
Comment 1 Jonathan Ryshpan 2015-05-02 22:11:38 UTC
I have about 100 filters created over the last several years, so that it's become very difficult to find exactly what filters Evolution is using or to find one for editing, or to bring together various filters that I may have created for similar purposes.  For example I need to find any filters for messages from a company I do business with or from another separate company that handles their communications.

(Sorry about the initial report.  I accidentally hit return.  

Also sorry that I am using what seems to be an ancient version; but it is the latest released under Fedora.)
Comment 2 Milan Crha 2015-05-05 15:43:33 UTC
(In reply to Jonathan Ryshpan from comment #1)
> Also sorry that I am using what seems to be an ancient version; but it is
> the latest released under Fedora.)

Out of curiosity, what is your fedora version and the evolution it it, please? You set the version to pre-1.5, which I doubt is true (Help->About in evolution).
Comment 3 Milan Crha 2015-05-05 15:53:38 UTC
I tried the searching functionality (the sort is obviously missing), and I see that one can search between configured filters (in Edit->Message Filters) when the list of message rules is selected and one starts to typing. It matches in a way of "begins with", rather than "contains".

Would change to search with "contains" be useful, and better, here?

With respect of the sort of the rules, I'm not sure whether the sorting should be permanent or rather only for the time when the dialog is opened. Both has its pros and cons.
Comment 4 Jonathan Ryshpan 2015-05-05 21:34:28 UTC
(In reply to Milan Crha from comment #2)
> (In reply to Jonathan Ryshpan from comment #1)
> > Also sorry that I am using what seems to be an ancient version; but it is
> > the latest released under Fedora.)
> 
> Out of curiosity, what is your fedora version and the evolution it it,
> please? You set the version to pre-1.5, which I doubt is true (Help->About
> in evolution).

Actually the version is 3.12.11 .  I don't know why I entered pre-1.5 in the version; my only excuse is that I got very little sleep the night before posting the enhancement request.  I have changed the version in the bug posting to the correct one.

The version of Linux is Fedora-21 with all upgrades installed, running on 4-processor x86_64 hardware.
Comment 5 Jonathan Ryshpan 2015-05-05 21:45:04 UTC
(In reply to Milan Crha from comment #3)
> I tried the searching functionality (the sort is obviously missing), and I
> see that one can search between configured filters (in Edit->Message
> Filters) when the list of message rules is selected and one starts to
> typing. It matches in a way of "begins with", rather than "contains".

Thanks for the pointer.  The function is quite handy but also unexpected.  Maybe a permanently visible search box, similar to the one that appears when the user starts typing would show the user that the function exists.

> Would change to search with "contains" be useful, and better, here?

This kind of searching of fields is usually "begins with".  I think "contains" would be confusing as the default.  A permanent search box could come with a choice of search methods: "begins with" vs. "contains" vs whatever.

> With respect of the sort of the rules, I'm not sure whether the sorting
> should be permanent or rather only for the time when the dialog is opened.
> Both has its pros and cons.

I think the sorting should be temporary unless the user presses an apply button, since the order of tests is affects the way the filters work.
Comment 6 Milan Crha 2015-05-06 04:59:18 UTC
(In reply to Jonathan Ryshpan from comment #4)
> Actually the version is 3.12.11.

That's okay, 3.12.11 is pretty good.

(In reply to Jonathan Ryshpan from comment #5)
> The function is quite handy but also unexpected.

It's a common way for searching with gtk+ widgets, it's enabled on many places.

> This kind of searching of fields is usually "begins with".  I think
> "contains" would be confusing as the default.  A permanent search box could
> come with a choice of search methods: "begins with" vs. "contains" vs
> whatever.

It can search versus filter, like hiding all which do not match the search criteria, but I do not want to make this overly complex.

> I think the sorting should be temporary unless the user presses an apply
> button, since the order of tests is affects the way the filters work.

Right, I didn't think of this at the beginning. I'd say the sorting should not be done then, accidentally saving sorted rules would break all the filters order irrecoverably, thus better to not offer it and focus on the search.
Comment 7 André Klapper 2017-08-16 13:51:54 UTC
It's unclear to me what is requested in this task and hence I don't know which criteria to apply to ever declare this task "fixed" or such.

What would you expect to happen in your situation?
Comment 8 André Klapper 2021-05-19 11:45:31 UTC
GNOME is going to shut down bugzilla.gnome.org in favor of gitlab.gnome.org. 
As part of that, we are mass-closing older open tickets in bugzilla.gnome.org (resources are unfortunately quite limited so not every ticket can get handled).

If you can still reproduce the situation described in this ticket in a recent
and supported software version, then please follow
  https://wiki.gnome.org/Community/GettingInTouch/BugReportingGuidelines
and create a new enhancement request ticket at
  https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution/-/issues/

Thank you for your understanding and your help.