Replies: 1 comment
-
Thanks for the kind words! TBH these are 3 different requests, so it’s probably worth separating them if you want them to get voted up (and implemented) if there’s interest. The third one, for example, sounds like a very good idea, the others are considerably more ‘bespoke’ if you know what I mean. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Hi All,
Again I simply love Paperless, have used it for years, since the first maintainer, Jonas (if I am not mistaken).
The work that you @stumpylog and @shamoon puts into this, is amazing. Considering the project is considered feature complete, you seize to impress me with new functionality, that just works.
I have been wondering for quite some time about what I am asking you now. We as a family use paperless. I am the only one that actually logs into paperless and maintains tags/correspondents, how/why to assign tags etc. My family generally just dumps documents into a scanner folder, and paperless takes care of the rest. I do review all documents from the inbox, but generally the automatic maching of tags etc works mostly flawless.
Question 1: I believe it would make sense to enable an option, so archived files creation date/modified date is modified to the actual created date in paperless. My family access a read-only archive version of paperless through nextcloud, and while this is mainly fine, the modified date of all of the files are updated whenever I play around with consumption/ocr settings etc. I generally save all of the documents with a custom naming scheme that works, based on date/corrospondent etc, however I believe it would make intuitively sense that the date of the archive file on the host OS is updated. This meaning that a full list of sallery statements will be sortable, by date, no matter what name the user, chooses. What are your thoughts of this? I do not believe this should be enabled as standard, but yet another option, for those who like this option.
Question 2: I really like custom fields, and for my use case, this is mostly for correspondents that only represent a small number of documents. Here I use company name, website etc.
I belive it would make sense to be able to link custom fields, with corrospondants. Thereby if eg: "IKEA" has the custom field "url" and eg. phone number, this info is automatically showed on the documents from Ikea. Ikea might be an stupid example, howver eg info from my employer. Paperless is not a CRM system, however basic ground data might make sense, to link to the correspondent. If for all of those companies I invoice, I could add a custom field like "Status:" when ever I open a document from this customer, I would be presented with eg: "DO NOT USE" in case of problems etc. Meaning broad data shared based on the correspondant....
Question 3: When using a custom field like url, this proposed text in the box is "https://" Great. However when I write anything this dissapears, so I need to write this again. If I simply write: "www.google.com" the field validation will reject the change. Would it make sense, to always include the https: if the user has put something into this field, and http/https is included, omit this, but if the user simple writes google.com, adjust this to https://google.com?
I am writing too much...
All the best from Denmark. :o)
/Benjamin
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions