On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 09:43 +0000, Pete Biggs wrote: > Something has been bothering me about this thread: it doesn't ring true > to me! So I've just done some experiments. I've got Evo (2.24.2) > running on my F10 box and Outlook2007 running on a Vista machine next to > it. Both are looking at the same Inbox via IMAP. > > I can delete a message in Evo, and that change isn't immediately visible > to Outlook. But all it needs is to move to another folder and virtually > immediately that message is then marked as deleted in Outlook. So some > write back of information is happening at times. > > It doesn't work in the other direction though - deleting in Outlook > doesn't get automatically picked up by Evo unless I force a reload of > the folders by closing it down and restarting. > > So the issue appears to *not* be one of Evo writing back the info. It's > an issue of Evo not *reading* and updating the cached information.
That actually makes a lot of sense. Not too long ago someone (I forget who, but they seemed to know what they were talking about) said that Evo synched when you changed folders. I was assuming that this had somehow changed with 2.24 but I hadn't tested it. Only a bit OT: half the problems people have with Evo could be solved if there was a clearly-defined model of what it does in various circumstances. I don't mean the source code, which let's face no-one is going to read, but an architectural definition, readable to the intelligent layman and guaranteed to be consistent across multiple versions. At the moment, all we have is a lot of folklore derived from the archives of this list, the FAQ, the very inadequate user documentation (which seems designed to conceal this sort of detail), and a lot of black-box experimentation. poc _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
