Procedure sometimes doesn't finish while in manual mode.
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:36 pmHi Mr. Noodle,
I have two different Hazel procedures that are similar, in that they
each consist of a few connected rules.
The first procedure takes a receipt file and sorts it, with a tag, as
either an office receipt or a personal receipt. The tagged file is then
acted on by the appropriate rule in that procedure's list of rules, with
the use of "Continue matching rules". The result is that the file is
moved to another folder in order to modify the file name and for
archiving.
The second procedure first takes an email file and changes its extension
from .emlx to .eml, strips off the numbers in the file name, and adds
the "Subject" of the email to the file name. Using "Continue matching
rules”, it next goes to the second rule to add the "Date Received" of
the email to the email filename.
Both procedures work as they should when Hazel is activated. The first
procedure, which works with receipts, also works well even if "Run Rules
Now" is selected when Hazel is not activated. The second procedure, for
emails, will only run its first rule if "Run Rules Now" is selected
while Hazel is not activated. The second procedure requires selecting
"Run Rules Now" a second time in order to run the second rule.
After manually running the second procedure, for email, the log shows
"...Did not match any rules." once it has moved to the second rule and
inspected the file with the modified filename that the first rule
produced. The log of the first procedure, for receipts, looks normal to
me after that procedure is run manually.
I only activate rules manually when I am first checking how a new
procedure is working. This difference in how Hazel has worked for me is
confusing, because I did not expect how it functions to differ between
manual and automatic modes, or to be different between somewhat similar
procedures. So I am confused. I could not find any reference to this
behavior in the Forums. I suspect what I have experienced is most
likely due to some small, inapparent oversight on my part. But I would
like to know if this is something that you have seen before, and I would
appreciate any advice you, or anyone else, can give me.
I have two different Hazel procedures that are similar, in that they
each consist of a few connected rules.
The first procedure takes a receipt file and sorts it, with a tag, as
either an office receipt or a personal receipt. The tagged file is then
acted on by the appropriate rule in that procedure's list of rules, with
the use of "Continue matching rules". The result is that the file is
moved to another folder in order to modify the file name and for
archiving.
The second procedure first takes an email file and changes its extension
from .emlx to .eml, strips off the numbers in the file name, and adds
the "Subject" of the email to the file name. Using "Continue matching
rules”, it next goes to the second rule to add the "Date Received" of
the email to the email filename.
Both procedures work as they should when Hazel is activated. The first
procedure, which works with receipts, also works well even if "Run Rules
Now" is selected when Hazel is not activated. The second procedure, for
emails, will only run its first rule if "Run Rules Now" is selected
while Hazel is not activated. The second procedure requires selecting
"Run Rules Now" a second time in order to run the second rule.
After manually running the second procedure, for email, the log shows
"...Did not match any rules." once it has moved to the second rule and
inspected the file with the modified filename that the first rule
produced. The log of the first procedure, for receipts, looks normal to
me after that procedure is run manually.
I only activate rules manually when I am first checking how a new
procedure is working. This difference in how Hazel has worked for me is
confusing, because I did not expect how it functions to differ between
manual and automatic modes, or to be different between somewhat similar
procedures. So I am confused. I could not find any reference to this
behavior in the Forums. I suspect what I have experienced is most
likely due to some small, inapparent oversight on my part. But I would
like to know if this is something that you have seen before, and I would
appreciate any advice you, or anyone else, can give me.