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 743533 - [IMAPx] Shared folders removed on folder list refresh
[IMAPx] Shared folders removed on folder list refresh
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: evolution-data-server
Classification: Platform
Component: general
3.12.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Evolution Shell Maintainers Team
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-01-26 12:34 UTC by Jordi Mallach
Modified: 2015-04-01 11:29 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Jordi Mallach 2015-01-26 12:34:10 UTC 
Hi!

Our mail server has a few shared folders configured with a bunch of subfolders.

Evolution appears to be very confused about what to do about them when "auto sync of remote email locally" is enabled.

I normally have this feature disabled, and I can see the shared folder just ok, and interact with the folders contents.

As soon as I enable the sync, the folder will immediately disappear from my folder tree.

If I unsubscribe from it and then subscribe again, it will come back for a short while to soon disappear again.

Disable sync again and the folder will come back, sometimes helped by an Evo restart.

What more data can I gather to poinpoint where the problem lies?

This is Debian unstable with evolution 3.12.8 + up to commit git20141130.241663 + eds 3.12.8 + git20141128.5242b0.
Comment 1 Milan Crha 2015-02-11 17:16:53 UTC 
Thanks for a bug report. I was able to reproduce the misbehaviour too. The problem was that the code which dropped the folders dropped them based on the current folder filter, which doesn't make much sense. As unknown folders are removed in a different way I dropped that code and everything seems to work fine now.

Created commit c64b95c in eds master (3.13.90+)
Comment 2 Milan Crha 2015-04-01 11:29:20 UTC 
The change wasn't the best, I missed some case. See bug #746828 for a regression.