On 9/2/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, August 31, 2007 6:32 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> > On 8/31/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Fri, August 31, 2007 5:15 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> >> >> >> >> Using SM 1.4.9a
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I have mu
On Fri, August 31, 2007 6:32 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> On 8/31/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, August 31, 2007 5:15 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
>> >> >> >> Using SM 1.4.9a
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected
>> >> >> >>
> > Your case sensitivity patch
> > is as follows. Thanks for pointing it out. If you don't mind, please
> > let us know if this patch fixes your issue.
>
> Thanks Paul. I'll try it tomorrow. I will do this manually, so I take it that
> what
> you've sent should replace the entire contents of th
On Fri, August 31, 2007 6:32 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> On 8/31/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, August 31, 2007 5:15 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
>> >> >> >> Using SM 1.4.9a
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected
>> >> >> >>
On 8/31/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, August 31, 2007 5:15 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> >> >> >> Using SM 1.4.9a
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected
> >> >> >> behaviour. If
> >> the
> >> >> >> "To"
> >> >> >> address of th
On Fri, August 31, 2007 5:15 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
>> >> >> Using SM 1.4.9a
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected
>> >> >> behaviour. If
>> the
>> >> >> "To"
>> >> >> address of the message I receive doesn't match the case of my alternate
>> >> identi
> >> >> Using SM 1.4.9a
> >> >>
> >> >> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected
> >> >> behaviour. If the
> >> >> "To"
> >> >> address of the message I receive doesn't match the case of my alternate
> >> identity,
> >> >> SM
> >> >> doesn't use that identity when I reply.
> >
On Fri, August 31, 2007 3:31 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> On 8/31/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello Paul:
>>
>> Thanks for the response.
>>
>> On Thu, August 30, 2007 5:53 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
>> > On 8/19/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Using SM 1.4
On 8/31/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Paul:
>
> Thanks for the response.
>
> On Thu, August 30, 2007 5:53 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> > On 8/19/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Using SM 1.4.9a
> >>
> >> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some
Hello Paul:
Thanks for the response.
On Thu, August 30, 2007 5:53 pm, Paul Lesniewski wrote:
> On 8/19/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Using SM 1.4.9a
>>
>> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected behaviour. If
>> the
>> "To"
>> address of the message I re
On 8/19/07, Alan in Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using SM 1.4.9a
>
> I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected behaviour. If
> the "To"
> address of the message I receive doesn't match the case of my alternate
> identity, SM
> doesn't use that identity when I reply.
A
Using SM 1.4.9a
I have multiple identities. I've just noticed some unexpected behaviour. If the
"To"
address of the message I receive doesn't match the case of my alternate
identity, SM
doesn't use that identity when I reply.
For example, if my alternate identity is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and someo
12 matches
Mail list logo