On Apr 27, 2006, at 3:03 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 13:54 -0700, richs@whidbey.net wrote:
I'd like to propose the attached patch to add an optional "outlook- dates" IMAP workaround, which returns the message "Date:" even when INTERNALDATE is specified.
Oh, that's evil. I always want to sort using the real INTERNALDATE because Date-header can sometimes be broken (especially with spams).
I admit that INTERNALDATE is a useful idea for experienced users, but
unfortunately our Outlook/OE users won't know any better.
It's unfortunate that Microsoft doesn't give users an easier choice,
or default to the more widely expected value. They could even change
"Date Received" to the actual time Outlook retrieved the message, if
an INTERNALDATE-concept was important to them.
Since "BODY.PEEK" is being called anyway, our tests didn't reveal any performance impact. Can anyone think of a scenario this would negatively impact? Another option might be to patch the APPEND
function?APPEND sounds better to me.. You could even make it get the timestamp from the first Received-header if it exists, which makes it pretty
close to INTERNALDATE's idea.
We would really like to see an APPEND patch, but we're still
concerned our file times won't match their original storage dates
unless we continually check and touch them.
Basically, as long as the message list date doesn't match the "Date:"
seen in the message, our users will be confused. Is there any chance
the optional workaround flag could make it to CVS?
Rich Sandberg richs@whidbey.net