[GH-ISSUE #326] Make move-to-folder automation predictable #259

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-25 21:31:33 +03:00 by kerem · 2 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:31:33 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @amo13 on GitHub (Mar 3, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ciur/papermerge/issues/326

Originally assigned to: @ciur on GitHub.

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Assume we have an automation to move a document to the "medical" folder if it matches the word "medical" and another automation to move a document to the "invoice" folder if it matches the word "invoice". Not we drop a document containing both words into the inbox for processing. Where will it be moved?

Describe the solution you'd like
I am not sure about how to solve this as it might require the implementation of a rather complex logic, which might be out of scope.
One idea that comes to my mind is having a priority/precedence setting maybe ranging from "low" to "high" or from 1 to 10. But I guess this is still a naive solution. Designing a logic that makes the selection of the destination folder 100% predictable according to settings in conflicting automations is probably nearly impossible. I guess this is why one prefers to use tags instead of folders.

Anyway, is there a way to predict the destination folder for conflicting automations like in the example above? Maybe I am just missing something here...

Originally created by @amo13 on GitHub (Mar 3, 2021). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/ciur/papermerge/issues/326 Originally assigned to: @ciur on GitHub. **Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.** Assume we have an automation to move a document to the "medical" folder if it matches the word "medical" and another automation to move a document to the "invoice" folder if it matches the word "invoice". Not we drop a document containing both words into the inbox for processing. Where will it be moved? **Describe the solution you'd like** I am not sure about how to solve this as it might require the implementation of a rather complex logic, which might be out of scope. One idea that comes to my mind is having a priority/precedence setting maybe ranging from "low" to "high" or from 1 to 10. But I guess this is still a naive solution. Designing a logic that makes the selection of the destination folder 100% predictable according to settings in conflicting automations is probably nearly impossible. I guess this is why one prefers to use tags instead of folders. Anyway, is there a way to predict the destination folder for conflicting automations like in the example above? Maybe I am just missing something here...

kerem

2026-02-25 21:31:33 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
enhancement

feature request
labels

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:31:34 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ciur commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2021):

Solution is to be as specific as possible. In your example, next to "medical" you need to add e.g. "Charité Universitätsmedizin" or other more specific keywords. Using just word "invoice" is too general.

is there a way to predict the destination folder for conflicting automations like in the example above

No. As I mentioned above, be as specific as possible with keywords.
You have a good point though, I will add this remark to documentation.

@ciur commented on GitHub (Mar 5, 2021): Solution is to be as specific as possible. In your example, next to "medical" you need to add e.g. "Charité Universitätsmedizin" or other more specific keywords. Using just word "invoice" is too general. > is there a way to predict the destination folder for conflicting automations like in the example above No. As I mentioned above, be as specific as possible with keywords. You have a good point though, I will add this remark to documentation.

kerem commented

2026-02-25 21:31:34 +03:00

Author

Owner

@MarcSN311 commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2021):

@ciur I had the same problem and I think there is a solution for this:

give automations an order and give the user the ability to change it. No complex priority, just a fixed order in which they are run.

@MarcSN311 commented on GitHub (Mar 15, 2021): @ciur I had the same problem and I think there is a solution for this: give automations an order and give the user the ability to change it. No complex priority, just a fixed order in which they are run.