> > I guess so. Just one last(?) question: where should this cosmetic fix > happen? In the upper pane where year-month-day is displayed or in the > lower pane where you can actually see the message, and the exact Date > header is shown?
I think it would be good in both places, but definitely in the lower pane where the message is displayed. Appreciate your attention on this! On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Janos SUTO <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2013-11-26 17:04, Keith Moore wrote: > >> You got an email from someone (probably me?) who's timezone is 7 hours >>> ahead yours, that's why the Received line show 14:46, but the Date header >>> (which is set by the sender) shows 21:46. >>> There was a debate whether to use what is in the Date header or the >>> actual >>> server time when it's archived. >>> Or it's possible that I misunderstand the whole thing, and you want me to >>> fix the stored timestamp value extracted from the Date: header, and make >>> +0000 >>> as -0700, ie. substract 7*3600 sec, because the 14:46 email shows up >>> among >>> the 21:46 emails even though it arrived much sooner. >>> >> >> The Received line is from my Exchange server and 14:46 was the local >> time here when the message was received. Exchange uses UTC for the >> Date: timestamp in the header of all emails. I would like the search >> results in Piler to display messages in the local time of the server, >> regardless of what the Date: stamp has... Does this make sense? So >> if the sending mail server uses +0000 (UTC), Piler would adjust for >> local time, say -0700 (Denver time) and display that... I cannot >> change the way Exchange stamps the Date to the messages. Piler would >> need to do the adjustment, not in the database, just in the web ui >> when it displays the messages. That way no matter what time zone the >> server is set to, Piler would display the messages with the local >> time. For example, If the message was stamped with -0500 (New York), >> piler would adjust by -0200 to get local time here in Denver. I think >> this is just a cosmetic thing, no need to alter the way messages are >> stored by piler. >> >> Hope this makes sense! >> > > I guess so. Just one last(?) question: where should this cosmetic fix > happen? In the upper pane where year-month-day is displayed or in the > lower pane where you can actually see the message, and the exact Date > header is shown? > > Janos > >
