On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 10:27 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote: > On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 15:52 -0400, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > > try suspending your laptop, go to home/work and open evolution there on > > > another box... Then you got 500 mails that you have previously > > > deleted/filtered... > > > > The IMAP protocol provides *no* guarantees about consistency when two or > > more clients are accessing the same mailbox simultaneously. This is not > > an Evo problem. Increasing the frequency of expunges will reduce the > > possibility of race conditions but not eliminate them entirely (BTW > > that's probably why your filters aren't working as expected.) > > In fact, the problem is that Evolution doesn't even marks the mails as > deleted on the server, and that's a *BUG*. > If you remember to put Evo offline before suspending (the small icon in > the bottom-left corner), Evo will tell the IMAP server which mails are > deleted and all is well (you can even purge or undelete the deleted > mails with an other client). The problem is that it should do that > regularly, in case of lost connexion or "surprise suspend". > > Thunderbird does it and it's a life-saver.
Exactly! Thunderbird does this very well and I think it uses a "regular expunge" approach. This would save me so many time during the day.. > Note that I'm speaking about deleted emails, not purged emails. As per > the IMAP spec, purging should be done separately. > > Yes, that bug has been reported many times over the years, and never > fixed. Please devs, consider this issue. If Evo was not a big code monster, I would contribute myself with a patch. Ruben _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
