EmailDiscussions.com  

Go Back   EmailDiscussions.com > Email Service Provider-specific Forums > FastMail Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Stay in touch wirelessly

FastMail Forum All posts relating to FastMail.FM should go here: suggestions, comments, requests for help, complaints, technical issues etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 18 Jun 2020, 06:13 PM   #16
JamesHenderson
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzzy View Post
I switched over to the "new" rules a few days ago because of the warning. As of 6/17 the choice of being able to switch back to the "old" rules no longer exists (for me anyway). So I guess "new" is "official" as they warned.
Does this effect you in real terms (I thought you only used your own scripts anyway)?
JamesHenderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18 Jun 2020, 06:32 PM   #17
xyzzy
Essential Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesHenderson View Post
Does this effect you in real terms (I thought you only used your own scripts anyway)?
I am not sure I understand your question with respect to "used your own scripts anyway". You can't suppress the standard FM boilerplate sieve code that handles the UI rules and settings and I do have a few explicit UI rules that I didn't want to write my own sieve code for since the UI was adequate for those. I have my extra sieve code (stuff that cannot be done in the UI) in the first edit block and the last edit block just as I had in the "old" sieve code. So my sieve additions works in either "old" or "new". I guess the more direct answer to your question is "no" this switch does not affect me in any way.

If I had to choose something that did bother me a little however it's that new FM generated code for fileinto which has some additional options that I don't fully understand what problem they are trying to address (some edge with IMAP maybe?). I wish I understood that better not that I could do the same thing with any fileinto's I would code since I would have to know mailboxid's.

Last edited by xyzzy : 18 Jun 2020 at 06:46 PM.
xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 Jun 2020, 07:23 PM   #18
JamesHenderson
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzzy View Post
I am not sure I understand your question with respect to "used your own scripts anyway". You can't suppress the standard FM boilerplate sieve code that handles the UI rules and settings and I do have a few explicit UI rules that I didn't want to write my own sieve code for since the UI was adequate for those. I have my extra sieve code (stuff that cannot be done in the UI) in the first edit block and the last edit block just as I had in the "old" sieve code. So my sieve additions works in either "old" or "new". I guess the more direct answer to your question is "no" this switch does not affect me in any way.

If I had to choose something that did bother me a little however it's that new FM generated code for fileinto which has some additional options that I don't fully understand what problem they are trying to address (some edge with IMAP maybe?). I wish I understood that better not that I could do the same thing with any fileinto's I would code since I would have to know mailboxid's.
You can (kind of) suppress the code by not setting any rules using the UI and writing them yourself.

I wrote all all my rules myself (you helped me - thanks for that!) in the "old" system as it allowed me to do more sophisticated things and I merely copy/paste'd them into the new system - works fine. One of the reasons for sticking with my own code is that I can still do things like:

if this and at least one of those 2:

Code:
if allof(
   address :contains "From" [<email-1>, <email-2>],
   anyof(
      header :contains "Subject" [<word-1>, <word-2>],
      body :text :contains [<phrase-1>, <phrase-2>, <phrase-3>]
      )
   )
{
   redirect :copy "<email-3>";
   }
[edit: typos]
JamesHenderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 19 Jun 2020, 02:04 AM   #19
xyzzy
Essential Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesHenderson View Post
You can (kind of) suppress the code by not setting any rules using the UI and writing them yourself.
Of course but that may be a bit of overkill!

Quote:
...the "old" system as it allowed me to do more sophisticated things...
Precisely and in addition IMO for some rules that contain multiple repetitive conditions (the UI's "All" or "Any") they are usually much easier to read/edit as opposed to the way the UI generates. The UI's code doesn't factor out the anyof/allof conditions. But for single simple conditions the UI is good enough.

Quote:
...and I merely copy/paste'd them into the new system - works fine.
Not sure why you had to do the copy/paste. When the ability to switch was still there I did all my sieve code editing in the "old" sieve (switched to "new" every once in a while to see what FM was doing to their own code but then switched back). In anticipation of the switch to "new" becoming "official" I switched to the "new" a few days in advance when they warned of the final date. Then when it became official they removed the ability to switch back to the "old" but my code was still there.

The reason I did the switch to "new" in advance was because I wasn't sure what was going to happen when they "shut" the door on going back to the "old". Were they going to map the "old" sieve code into the "new" (not possible for those that had code in the "old" middle edit blocks) as if you did the switch explicitly yourself or were they going to just start off with the base-line code with only the UI generated rules added (thus losing your own code additions)? Turns out if you were already using the "new" when they removed the ability to go back they simply used whatever you currently had so no copy/paste was necessary. For me it wouldn't have mattered too much anyway because I always keep a backup of my current sieve script (using "copy to clipboard" button at the top of the sieve script) and could of then pasted in from that.
xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 Jun 2020, 02:29 AM   #20
JamesHenderson
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzzy View Post
Of course but that may be a bit of overkill!
I have quite a lot of "if from this company move to that folder" type rules. I found it easier to keep them in alphabetical order and group by reason (eg "shopping"). It was easier to keep sorted and have comments etc in sieve. Only one or two rules required sieve because of their complexity (as per my earlier example).


Quote:
Originally Posted by xyzzy View Post
Not sure why you had to do the copy/paste.
It wouldn't allow me to upgrade until I had removed my own sieve.
JamesHenderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 19 Jun 2020, 02:46 AM   #21
xyzzy
Essential Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 280
Quote:
It wouldn't allow me to upgrade until I had removed my own sieve.
Ah ha, you must have been one of those that had code in the middle edit blocks that I mentioned. In that case even when you could switch back and forth it wouldn't let you switch to the "new". All my stuff is in the beginning or end so switching was allowed.
xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 Jun 2020, 06:23 PM   #22
FredOnline
The "e" in e-mail
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 2,329
Bye-bye FastMail

https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/com...ebye_fastmail/
FredOnline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 Jun 2020, 08:02 PM   #23
JamesHenderson
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 556
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredOnline View Post
Are you RelativeOfJack of are you just sharing the post?

cheers.

[edit:] No matter, I have replied to RelativeOfJack in that thread :-)

Last edited by JamesHenderson : 19 Jun 2020 at 08:39 PM. Reason: added final sentence & 1 typo.
JamesHenderson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 19 Jun 2020, 08:26 PM   #24
TenFour
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 779
I really don't understand this need to create aliases on the fly for each place that needs my email address. I've had the same Gmail address since 2006 and I have other email addresses I use for various things. Everything funnels to my Gmail Inbox. I get almost no spam in the Inbox. If I do get something I don't want I first try to unsubscribe using the links in the email or I can easily just block them in Gmail if someone still spams me. I've got a handful of blocks and they work perfectly. At work I do the same thing with Outlook/Exchange and it works almost as well, though Microsoft likes to put legitimate emails into the Junk folder. Creating all those aliases adds so much complexity, and it seems to indicate a failure of the basic email functionality of Junk/Spam filtering.
TenFour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 Jun 2020, 11:44 PM   #25
SideshowBob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenFour View Post
I really don't understand this need to create aliases on the fly for each place that needs my email address.
It got a lot of advocacy in the early days of Fastmail when free and member account had no spam filtering and SpamAssassin's effectiveness varied a lot between accounts.

It's still useful to be able to block spam without it ending up in the spam folder. When you get an FP it's much better that it's in a folder with a few spams rather than a few hundred.

I'm not sure what used to happen with discard rules, but the new delete to trash occurs after spam filtering as do FMs workarounds. They only way to get the benefit of an empty spam folder is to discard/fileinto directly in sieve.

Last edited by SideshowBob : 23 Jun 2020 at 06:36 AM.
SideshowBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +9. The time now is 03:22 AM.

 

Copyright EmailDiscussions.com 1998-2013. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy