On March 3, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Maybe we need a ignore regexp or something? (of course there could be
> one and I'm just ignorant).
You could try setting up a hook in bbdb-canonicalize-net-hook that
reduces your correspondent's email down to whatever you've already got
stored in BBDB. This
> Robert wrote:
Robert> Actually, the head of CVS is handling it really as a hook,
Robert> i.e. a list of functions ... there is also some note in the
Robert> code
Ha! See what comments can to do you. I read the very same comment
last night and took it for a confirmation that it wasn't a tru
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 09:16:33 +0100, Mats Lidell
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Is there some way to ignore addresses that are old?
If you're using BBDB from CVS take a look at bbdb-obsolete.el in the
(unsupported) bits directory. Note that the provide statement in the
file is wrong (for
Ronan Waide wrote:
> I was thinking of bbdb-obsolete-net.el in the bits directory.
>
> Or here: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01827.html
I was about to post a copy myself. :-)
--
Colin
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored b
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 09:16:33 +0100, Mats Lidell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Mats> Is there some way to ignore addresses that are old?
Actually, my problem is that one person is now sending all her mail to
lists using a unique address. Everytime I see a message from her,
bbdb prompts me for a
Patrick Drechsler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Or are there other conversion tools for this task?
At http://valente.de/aldo/bbdb/ is a perlscript named bbdb2txt.
Aldo
--
* Reality is a crutch for people who can't handle drugs.
---
This S
Mats Lidell wrote (of bbdb-obsolete-net.el):
> [...] nearly what I wanted. There are more attributes then net. When
> testing the code I realized that it wouldn't stop the notice-hook to
> do it's work. So visiting an old email will, depending on the
> definition of the bbdb-auto-notes-alist, pos
On Thursday, March 4, 2004 at 00:20:59, Mats Lidell wrote:
[...]
> So it might be a good idea if bbdb-canonicalize-net-hook would take
> a list of hooks and apply them in sequence!?
Actually, the head of CVS is handling it really as a hook,
i.e. a list of functions ... there is also some note in t
