<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://bugs.horde.org/themes/feed-rss.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
 <channel>
  <title>Forwarding should show &quot;disabled&quot; if no forward address is set</title>
  <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:50:47 -0400</pubDate>
  <link>http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/3258</link>
  <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" title="Forwarding should show &quot;disabled&quot; if no forward address is set" href="http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/3258/rss" />
  <description>Forwarding should show &quot;disabled&quot; if no forward address is set</description>

  
  
  <item>
   <title>If I don't have a forwarding address set up, then the filter</title>
   <description>If I don't have a forwarding address set up, then the filter list shows forwarding as &quot;enabled&quot;.  This seems confusing.  Forwarding should be disabled unless there's actually an address set.</description>
   <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:17:02 -0500</pubDate>
   <link>http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/3258#t15501</link>
  </item>
  <item>
   <title>I'm not sure anymore if this is really a good thing. The rul</title>
   <description>I'm not sure anymore if this is really a good thing. The rule's status is saved independently from the rule itself, thus we would need to change the status additionally when saving the rule. To be consistent, we would need to enable as well as disable the rule automatically, but I think that enabling the rule automatically (especially if combined with the preference to automatically upload scripts) could make some users really unhappy.</description>
   <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:04:30 -0400</pubDate>
   <link>http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/3258#t19388</link>
  </item>
  <item>
   <title>I think this is only a display confusion, not a db, so you c</title>
   <description>I think this is only a display confusion, not a db, so you can't solve it in the db level.

What if we create a new symbol instead of the green check, namely a yellow question mark. If the state is enabled but the rule is not well configured (no addresses for forward, no message for vacation, etc.) we display that. It  means the state is enabled in database, but the displayed icon is a warning to the user. She can only change that to a red cross of course with a click, so he must fix the rule, if she wants the green check. And if she fixes, the rule 'automatically gets enabled'.

gergely</description>
   <pubDate>Tue, 29 Aug 2006 09:26:01 -0400</pubDate>
   <link>http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/3258#t23610</link>
  </item>
  <item>
   <title>That still requires us to introspect each rule in the rule o</title>
   <description>That still requires us to introspect each rule in the rule overview, because only if you analyze the rule in the context of the used script backend, you can tell if a rule is incomplete or not. Might be worth it though.</description>
   <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 2006 12:51:20 -0400</pubDate>
   <link>http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/3258#t24267</link>
  </item>
  <item>
   <title>I think we should go ahead and do that - seems worth it and </title>
   <description>I think we should go ahead and do that - seems worth it and as long as we can have our backends do the validation, not so bad.</description>
   <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 17:42:58 -0400</pubDate>
   <link>http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/3258#t31652</link>
  </item>
  

 </channel>
</rss>
