jeevatkm/ReplyWithHeaderMozilla

Thunderbird 125 disable this extension

Closed this issue · 6 comments

@gabri25ele Thanks for reporting it. I'm working on a WebExtension add-on for the upcoming July TB ESR release.

@gabri25ele I'm working on the WebExtension version of RWH. The branch is here.

I require a sample string of the following in multiple languages for a Plain Text email.

Reply

On 4/27/24 5:58 PM, Thunderbird Add-ons wrote:

Forward

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Mozilla Add-on User Rating: ReplyWithHeader
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 00:58:03 -0000
From: Thunderbird Add-ons <nobody@thunderbird.net>
To: jeeva@myjeeva.com

@gabri25ele I'm working on the WebExtension version of RWH. The branch is here.

I require a sample string of the following in multiple languages for a Plain Text email.

Reply

On 4/27/24 5:58 PM, Thunderbird Add-ons wrote:

Forward

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Mozilla Add-on User Rating: ReplyWithHeader
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 00:58:03 -0000
From: Thunderbird Add-ons <nobody@thunderbird.net>
To: jeeva@myjeeva.com

mine (in italian)

Il 27/04/2024 alle 17:58, Thunderbird ha scritto:

-------- messaggio originale --------
Da: Kissashop [mailto:info@kissashop.it]
Inviata: mercoledì 24 aprile 2024 alle ore 12:32
A: myemail@gmail.com
Oggetto: TERRY DOSON PRESENTA

Thanks, @gabri25ele, for your help.

Hello @gabri25ele -

I have created an RWH {Web|Mail}Extension version of the add-on. The v3 version is a complete rewrite from the ground up. Please try it and share feedback on this thread #103.
I have developed a significantly improved and capable RWH in v3. You will find it to be a significant enhancement to your workflow.

Download Link: https://docs.myjeeva.com/rwh-mozilla/replywithheader-v3.0.0.beta1.xpi

It requires minimum, TB v125 - https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/thunderbird/releases/125.0/

Cheers, Jeeva

problem in "object"

old version
old

more correct
the "RE" is removed

new version
new
the "RE" is present

;)

then I found that it's not good for newsserver accounts, ok they should be disabled.
But could they have already been disabled at the start?
Or is it even better to have an answer made specifically for this type of account?