split a conversation in two, combine into conversation
Jacob606
into separate trains of thought. I'd like to split them into separate
emails, to give them different labels, different search criteria, etc.
If this requires an option to "rename" an email, that would be fine.
I'd also like to be able to GROUP separate emails into
"conversations". While I can give two different emails the same label,
I'd actually like to attach two or more emails into a thread that
looks exactly like "conversation" emails.
I'd again also like to search has:conversation, or has:conversation:7+
(meaning all conversations with 7 or more emails)
As it is now, the conversation feature is quite limiting. It should
have variation to it. It should be more controllable.
Lowrider130
I get invoices from companies related to my customers. Many have the
same subject ("Order Confirmed.."), so they get grouped together and I
can't give each one a label for each customer.
Depending on it's implementation, I can see some level of difficulty
(programming wise) to give a lot of options to the user in managing
the conversations. But at the very least splitting should be
available.
I implemented a similar system for internal emails for a web
application (almost like facebook, but not). At the time I didn't
think about the ability to merge or split conversations, but now I'm
thinking about it and how difficult/easy it would be to add. I based
my code on a thread ID, and not just on the subject and contacts. So
on mine it wouldn't be too bad to change, splitting would just be
changing thread ID in the database for the new conversation. I assume
Google implemented it similar way. Sorry, I started rambling and
brain-storming.
On Nov 11, 12:15 pm, Jacob606 wrote:
> I want tosplitconversationsinto pieces. Someconversationsevolve
> into separate trains of thought. I'd like tosplitthem into separate
> If this requires an option to "rename" an email, that would be fine.
>
> I'd also like to be able to GROUP separate emails into
> "conversations". While I can give two different emails the same label,
> I'd actually like to attach two or more emails into a thread that
> looks exactly like "conversation" emails.
>
> I'd again also like to search has:conversation, or has:conversation:7+
hejsan
different view than conversation view.
Many people that I have helped set up gmail are uncomfortable with the
conversation view and are afraid they might reply to the wrong person,
for example when dealing with a forwarded message from a customer,
then you have to reply to the person you forwarded to and the
customer.
Why not implement a classic "flat" view. The one in Apple Mail is
fine, it highlights other messages from the same conversation.
my 2 cents,
hejsan
shaws
and u send mail to that one instead of the sender and their reply
comes as a separate conversation, which many a times loses the flow.
On Nov 24, 9:47 pm, hejsan wrote:
> I think a better solution would be to allow users to select a
> different view than conversation view.
>
> Many people that I have helped set up gmail are uncomfortable with the
> conversation view and are afraid they might reply to the wrong person,
> for example when dealing with a forwarded message from a customer,
> then you have to reply to the person you forwarded to and the
> customer.
>
> Why not implement a classic "flat" view. The one in Apple Mail is
> fine, it highlights other messages from the same conversation.
>
> my 2 cents,
> hejsan
>
> On Nov 24, 3:58 pm, Lowrider130 wrote:
>
> > I agree we should be able to manage conversations better.
>
> > I get invoices from companies related to my customers. Many have the
> > same subject ("Order Confirmed.."), so they get grouped together and I
> > can't give each one a label for each customer.
>
> > Depending on it's implementation, I can see some level of difficulty
> > (programming wise) to give a lot of options to the user in managing
> > the conversations. But at the very least splitting should be
> > available.
>
> > my code on a thread ID, and not just on the subject and contacts. So
> > on mine it wouldn't be too bad to change, splitting would just be
> > changing thread ID in the database for the new conversation. I assume
> > Google implemented it similar way. Sorry, I started rambling and
> > brain-storming.
>
> > On Nov 11, 12:15 pm, Jacob606 wrote:
>
> > > I want tosplitconversationsinto pieces. Someconversationsevolve
> > > into separate trains of thought. I'd like tosplitthem into separate
> > >emails, to give them different labels, different search criteria, etc.
> > > If this requires an option to "rename" an email, that would be fine.
>
> > > I'd also like to be able to GROUP separateemailsinto
> > > I'd actually like to attachtwoor moreemailsinto a thread that
premedios
On Nov 24, 4:47 pm, hejsan wrote:
> I think a better solution would be to allow users to select a
> different view thanconversationview.
>
> then you have to reply to the person you forwarded to and the
> customer.
>
> Why not implement a classic "flat" view. The one in Apple Mail is
> fine, it highlights other messages from the sameconversation.
>
> my 2 cents,
> hejsan
>
> On Nov 24, 3:58 pm, Lowrider130 wrote:
>
> > I agree we should be able to manage conversations better.
>
> > I get invoices from companies related to my customers. Many have the
> > same subject ("Order Confirmed.."), so they get grouped together and I
> > can't give each one a label for each customer.
>
> > Depending on it's implementation, I can see some level of difficulty
> > (programming wise) to give a lot of options to the user in managing
> > the conversations. But at the very least splitting should be
> > available.
>
> > I implemented a similar system for internal emails for a web
> > application (almost like facebook, but not). At the time I didn't
> > think about the ability to merge or split conversations, but now I'm
> > thinking about it and how difficult/easy it would be to add. I based
> > my code on a thread ID, and not just on the subject and contacts. So
> > on mine it wouldn't be too bad to change, splitting would just be
> > brain-storming.
>
> > On Nov 11, 12:15 pm, Jacob606 wrote:
>
> > > I want tosplitconversationsinto pieces. Someconversationsevolve
> > > into separate trains of thought. I'd like tosplitthem into separate
> > > emails, to give them different labels, different search criteria, etc.
> > > If this requires an option to "rename" an email, that would be fine.
>
> > > I'd also like to be able to GROUP separate emails into
> > > "conversations". While I can give two different emails the same label,
> > > I'd actually like to attach two or more emails into a thread that
> > > looks exactly like "conversation" emails.
>
> > > I'd again also like to search has:conversation, or has:conversation:7+
> > > (meaning allconversationswith 7 or more emails)
>
bfinoradin
darky001
And it would be great if you could specify rules for grouping
conversations together by sending.
E.g.: All coming mails from the sender xy AND the subject abc OR def
in the timespan from the 1.1.2010 to the 31.12.2010 should be grouped
into one conversation.
Theodor N.
kjkorslund
with the same subject to different customers and we want to keep those
threads separate, but GMail tends to group them. I suppose the
question is, if you manually split a conversation into two threads,
which thread is supposed to be used for new incoming messages? I
suppose the original thread receives new messages, but it's not
terribly useful to be able to split threads if you have to manually
fix every new incoming message. Maybe the rules idea suggested by
darky001 could be used to automatically sort it.
Ah well, maybe if Wave takes off this sort of problem will become a
thing of the past :)
kgholderman
instances where the same email shows up on 4 or 5 groups I'm on... and
I'd like them to not all be grouped together... so I can keep them
separate.
BenLane
email daily. Sometimes, gMail adds an email received today to the
conversation from yesterday. Being able to break them up into two
conversations would be awesome because I print them at the end of the
day and wouldn't need to worry about having to print some pages twice.
M. Walker
threads!!! Also, it would be fantastic to be able to manually merge
different messages together into a thread.
On Jan 7, 4:39 pm, kjkorslund wrote:
> I really need this feature. Sometimes I or a coworker send messages
> with the same subject to different customers and we want to keep those
> threads separate, but GMail tends to group them. I suppose the
> question is, if you manuallysplita conversation into two threads,
> which thread is supposed to be used for new incoming messages? I
> suppose the original thread receives new messages, but it's not
> terribly useful to be able tosplitthreads if you have to manually
> fix every new incoming message. Maybe the rules idea suggested by
> darky001 could be used to automatically sort it.
>
> Ah well, maybe if Wave takes off this sort of problem will become a
> thing of the past :)
>
> On Dec 22 2009, 6:31 am, darky001 wrote:
>
>
>
> > I would like to see this feauture, too.
> > And it would be great if you could specify rules for grouping
> > conversations together by sending.
> > E.g.: All coming mails from the sender xy AND the subject abc OR def
> > in the timespan from the 1.1.2010 to the 31.12.2010 should be grouped
> > into oneconversation.
>
> > On Nov 11, 6:15 pm, Jacob606 wrote:
>
> > > I want tosplitconversations into pieces. Some conversations evolve
> > > into separate trains of thought. I'd like tosplitthem into separate
> > > emails, to give them different labels, different search criteria, etc.
> > > If this requires an option to "rename" an email, that would be fine.
>
> > > I'd also like to be able to GROUP separate emails into
> > > "conversations". While I can give two different emails the same label,
> > > I'd actually like to attach two or more emails into a thread that
> > > looks exactly like "conversation" emails.
>
> > > I'd again also like to search has:conversation, or has:conversation:7+
> > > (meaning all conversations with 7 or more emails)
>
> > > As it is now, theconversationfeature is quite limiting. It should
> > > have variation to it. It should be more controllable.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hexagon
tracking numbers for 10 shipments over time, invariably with the same
subject they get chucked into the same conversation and squeezed. For
example, I use labels to keep track of which email refers to a
shipment that has arrived - you get the picture.
I favour a simple orphan rule to start with - when an email is broken
out of the main conversation stream, it sits there alone, period,
except for reply/forward actions directly associated with it. Coupled
with moving an email from conversation to conversation, you have a
rudimentary manual sorting system that will *work*.
If you desire full automation, you'd be wrestling with a beast about
as dangerous as the indiscriminate conversation merging. Breaking
actual conversations persay would need more complex rules, like
suggested, or a simple trunk/branch pruning rule which would need
additional complex analysis of "show quoted text" stream and subject
content. But the basis is any additional branches (incoming emails)
growing on a separated "branch" should go on that branch, not be
folded into the main trunk. Essentially, threaded conversation with
the ability to split and merge, just like it is in this very groups
discussion.
On Jan 7, 3:39 pm, kjkorslund wrote:
> I really need this feature. Sometimes I or a coworker send messages
> with the same subject to different customers and we want to keep those
> threads separate, but GMail tends to group them. I suppose the
> question is, if you manuallysplita conversation into two threads,
> which thread is supposed to be used for new incoming messages? I
> suppose the original thread receives new messages, but it's not
> terribly useful to be able tosplitthreads if you have to manually
> fix every new incoming message. Maybe the rules idea suggested by
> darky001 could be used to automatically sort it.
>
> Ah well, maybe if Wave takes off this sort of problem will become a
> thing of the past :)
>
> On Dec 22 2009, 6:31 am, darky001 wrote:
>
> > I would like to see this feauture, too.
> > And it would be great if you could specify rules for grouping
> > conversations together by sending.
> > E.g.: All coming mails from the sender xy AND the subject abc OR def
> > in the timespan from the 1.1.2010 to the 31.12.2010 should be grouped
> > into oneconversation.
>
> > On Nov 11, 6:15 pm, Jacob606 wrote:
>
> > > I want tosplitconversations into pieces. Some conversations evolve
> > > into separate trains of thought. I'd like tosplitthem into separate
JohnW2
"Suggestions" page,
at http://mail.google.com/support/bin/static.py?page=suggestions.cs
you'd find that this has been in the suggestions pipeline for several
years!!
There aren't any Google staff monitoring this forum, so that's gonna
be your best bet!
M. Walker
which I assume is the closest thing to the suggestion here. I'm sad to
hear this has been an idea kicked around for so long and nothing has
been done about it yet. I'd really like to have this feature.
On Mar 7, 6:07 am, JohnW2 wrote:
> If all the readers/posters who want this were to use the proper
> "Suggestions" page,
> athttp://mail.google.com/support/bin/static.py?page=suggestions.cs
Theodor N.
+1
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Davetv72
messages.