Search Support

Avoid support scams. We will never ask you to call or text a phone number or share personal information. Please report suspicious activity using the “Report Abuse” option.

Learn More

Wannan tattunawa ta zama daɗaɗɗiya. Yi sabuwar tambaya idan ka na bukatar taimako.

Thunderbird isn't using my retention policy on trash

  • 5 amsoshi
  • 1 yana da wannan matsala
  • 22 views
  • Amsa ta ƙarshe daga christ1

more options

Thunderbird (68.4.1) seems to be deleting messages that are over 5 days old from my IMAP Trash folder. I have a retention policy set to not delete anything in the Trash folder until it is over 60 days old.

The Activity log in Thunderbird shows "Deleted 507 messages from Trash" just a few minutes ago.

I believe this started in the last few months. My retention policy/settings haven't been changed in a couple of years.

All Replies (5)

more options

Check with your email provider what the retention period is on their server.

more options

@christ1 - Thanks for the reply. I run my own IMAP server. As I mentioned in my original post I can see in Thunderbird's activity log that thunderbird is doing the deletion -- "Deleted 507 messages from Trash"

I wish there was a way to access/export the Thunderbird activity log as a text or something searchable.

more options

Check this article for other possible reasons. http://kb.mozillazine.org/Disappearing_mail

Are there any other devices accessing the same server. They may be the reason for deleting messages.

Note, with IMAP, all messages are managed on the server. When you see messages being deleted in Thunderbird, this possibly just shows Thunderbird catching up and synchronizing the changes already made on the server.

more options

@christ1 - So if I understand what you are saying when thunderbird's activity log shows "Deleted 507 messages from Trash" it could either be because Thunderbird actually deleted the messages in the IMAP store, or because Thunderbird has detected that those messages were deleted from the IMAP store and is now reflecting the delete in it's local cache?

more options

Exactly right. The latter sounds more likely to me though.