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 206463 - Please implement a "Check for new mail when starting Evolution" option.
Please implement a "Check for new mail when starting Evolution" option.
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 239475
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
unspecified
Other All
: Normal enhancement
: Future
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
: 216982 230047 249544 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: 216982
 
 
Reported: 2001-08-05 21:37 UTC by Miles Lane
Modified: 2004-05-10 17:27 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: Unversioned Enhancement


Description Miles Lane 2001-08-05 21:37:10 UTC 
There needs to be a way to have checking for new mail
happen immediately on program startup.
Comment 1 Jeffrey Stedfast 2002-01-31 18:43:59 UTC 
*** bug 216982 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Not Zed 2002-09-12 03:36:22 UTC 
*** bug 230047 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Johan Walles 2002-09-29 10:25:14 UTC 
Since your [Ximian's] version of Bugzilla don't seem to support
voting, I'll just chime in like this: "I want this too".

Also, I think that this don't necessarily have to be an option; it
could be the only available behaviour.  The reason is that when you
say you want an account to be checked for mail every 10 minutes (for
example), you never say anything about when the first check should occur.

Evolution currently (entirely arbitrarily AFAICT) decides for you that
this means that the first check should be in 10 minutes.  However,
unless somebody can come up with a good reason for that decision, I
think that any automatically checked account should instead be checked
ASAP after startup, and then every N minutes.

Thus, IMO, this doesn't have to be an option; it could as well be the
only available behaviour.
Comment 4 tc270 2003-10-13 21:56:11 UTC 
*** bug 249544 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 André Klapper 2004-05-10 17:27:24 UTC 
this si a subset of bug 239475. closing.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 239475 ***