-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
AddOn not working on 115 #195
Comments
I'm sorry for the long delay in noticing this bug report. Version 0.5.4b5 works with all Thunderbird 115.x versions; version 0.6.0 works with TB 128.x . If you mean you're not finding duplicates - that is probably because your messages are almost-duplicates of each other. Message bodies often differ slightly, e.g. by an extra newline - and this can be due to differences in the way the "same" message is handled. I would recommend a different set of comparison criteria, and a careful check using the review dialog before actually deleting the messages. |
Hi,
Thanks for answering.
The thing is that the messages i have as duplicates arrive from
websites and telephony systems so they are for sure duplicates.
Up until the time i sent the bug it worked fine for years.
As website forms are being submited with double clicking and
received multiple times i try to remove these duplicates from my
inbox. Comparing body does not work no matter what i am testing...
the ONLY difference between the two are the exact second it
arrives. tested multiple options, including time span of seconds
and minutes - it does not work.
The telephony systems are also based on template - same number
keeps calling like 3 times over 1 minute - i get 3 messages with
same details - the add on does not detect that.
Is there any thing you can try and adjust so it will work as for
previous versions of TB did?
|
They are what you would consider duplicates; but - they may in practice be slightly different. They may have different number of empty lines at the bottom; their send time may be slightly different; etc. Please start removing comparison criteria until you actually start to get duplicates, then add some back carefully so that you actually capture the messages you want to. |
Their submission time is for sure different - most times by few
seconds. The addon found them in the past with no problem...
per empty lines - i know its nogical but not in this case as the
site uses template. same all the time.
any other suggestions?
|
Please attach an mbox file with a couple of such duplicates, which the add-on fails to find; or send it to me, zipped, and I'll check. But I very much doubt it, as the dupe identification logic has not changed in years, and users don't complain about it. When they do complain, it always ends up being the case of overly-strict comparison criteria. |
For testing purposes i copied a message to another folder and
than moved it to the original folder. This is a pure duplicate.
Even in this case - Duplicate check by Body does not work. The
fail i think if by Body. This feature setting stopped working...
|
@lkasdj9 : First, please don't comment by replying to the email, since GitHub messages up the message and adds a lot of header content, and a copy of my own previous message... :-( Anyway, can you possibly attach an mbox file with those two duplicate messages, for me to check? If not, could you possibly email such an mbox file, zipped, to me? |
Sent you the files via email. Thanks |
body p { margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt; }
Hi,
I did not hear back from you after few
messages i sent as requested.
I was wondering if you received the
zipped folder i sent to demonstrate the issue.
Thanks
|
Hi,
Currently i am on 115.4.2 but even on earlier 115 versions the add did not find any duplicates.
My settings are to compare Subject and Body, in matter of minutes.
Even when i tested with/without number of lines - not working....
I must compare both Subject and Body. During my tests - Subject alone works. Body alone does not work.
Am happy to make more tests.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: