[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [imapsync] Re: FirstClass to Google


From Gilles LAMIRAL <gilles dot lamiral at laposte dot net>
Subject Re: [imapsync] Re: FirstClass to Google
Date Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:29:13 +0200

Hello Adam,

In terms of it missing messages because of FirstClass reporting erroneous RFC822.DATE - running the same command with --nofoldersizes makes a huge difference is the messages that it transfers.

That's what I was going to suggest looking at the options used.


So in terms of the date options - I want to make sure I've chosen the best option....

I'm using --idatefromheader (rather then the default of --syncinternaldates) since testing suggested that it was the better option, but now on the messages that it's transferring that it was missing without the --nofoldersizes 100 percent of the message arrived dates are the current time.

Ok. What are the dates of the previous transfer?

The following excerpt shows how it's doing the date, which certainly looks correct to me.

Yes.


This shows up correctly when you open the message in google webmail,

May be google webmail show you the "Date:" header.


but the folder list (message arrived date) show the transferred date today.

I don't know how google webmail decide to sort messages. Search or ask google.

Haven't paid attention to what it does with the --syncinternaldates

Have and tell us.


header date from 1: [Wed, 27 May 2009 21:10:33 -0500]
header date from 1: [Wed, 27 May 2009 21:10:33 -0500] (fixed)
flags & date from: [\Seen][Wed, 27 May 2009 21:10:33 -0500]
Sending literal: 2016 APPEND Transferred-INBOX (\Seen) "Wed, 27 May 2009 21:10:33 -0500" {204976}
then: Message-id: <fc dot 011edd9000563436011edd9000563436 dot 563453 at MASKED>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 21:10:33 -0500

Seems all good.


--
Au revoir,                             09 51 84 42 42
Gilles Lamiral. France, Baulon (35580) 06 20 79 76 06