After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 769620 - Ensure Date field is filled in the folder summary
Ensure Date field is filled in the folder summary
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
3.20.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Low enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
: 615443 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2016-08-08 09:19 UTC by Khad
Modified: 2018-10-25 16:29 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Khad 2016-08-08 09:19:25 UTC 
Action to "Archive this folder using this setting, cleanup messages older than xx" , will always include emails without Date: header (Like ebilling email, or other email from script)

It would be great if evolution fills automatically Date as Received date for those email. This should also be implemented in other date related action , like search by date


thanks
Comment 1 Khad 2016-08-08 09:45:28 UTC 
Additional info:
I'm using IMAP, evolution can show correctly Received Date and Date:? when opening imap folder
Comment 2 Milan Crha 2016-08-18 13:08:25 UTC 
Thanks for a bug report. The Date header is sort of important and when it's not available when the message is received (or imported), then it's added anyway and can be seen in the message preview, only the message summary has it empty. I made a change to fallback to the Received header and if even that isn't available, then use the current time for the summary. This will correct the Archive feature too. It will only work for newly received messages (or if you let re-download your IMAP summary from scratch, but I'd not do that personally).

Created commit 9210a99 in eds master (3.21.91+)
Comment 3 Milan Crha 2018-10-25 16:29:55 UTC 
*** Bug 615443 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***