https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=417206
--- Comment #10 from Erik Quaeghebeur <[email protected]> --- (In reply to kernel_panic from comment #8) > For example, GMail uses the timestamp provided in the APPEND command to > store, index, and display messages in its web interface. This timestamp may > be different to the one provided in the message header. However, it appears > that this timestamp is stored separately (presumably in some indexing > database) since the original message's Date header is left intact and > showing the correct timestamp. […] I think there is a misunderstanding. The INTERNAl DATE is *not* the same as the Date header value and it should not be according to the RFC. (Usually, it will be close, but can differ significantly[*] if message delivery is delayed.) Please read https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3501#section-2.3.3 for a description. GMail does follow the RFC here AFAICT and uses the ‘REFS’ threading option. (As does, e.g., Fastmail.) [*] So that order of mails in a thread differs based on INTERNAL DATE or Date header. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
