broken date headers are interpreted badly

[eMBee]

this is different from missing a date at all, which is only a problem at import but not at day to day use.

after importing a million messages i am now not only facing a dozen threads that are stuck to the top of my inbox because they have a date in the future, but worse some of those dates are different from the date in the actual email, and i don't know how many threads i am not seeing with wrong dates in the past.

this can be dangerous if i am not seeing new incoming mails because they get assigned a date in the past.
it is the reason for me to sort my mails by the date received and simply ignore the actual Date header. (but that's a different issue)

here is a list of date interpretations:

Date: l\xf6r, 29 maj 1999 00:24:04 +0200 (CEST)  ->  March 28 2014 11:24PM -> in index shown as: Yest.11pm
Date: fre, 28 maj 1999 21:47:11 +0200 (CEST)     ->  March 28 2014  8:47PM -> shown as: Yest. 9pm
Date: ons, 26 maj 1999 11:00:34 +0200 (CEST)     ->  March 26 2014 10:00AM  -> shown as: Yest.10am
Date: Di, 17 Mai 2005 12:31:00 0200              ->  March 17 2014 12:31PM   -> shown as: Yest. 1pm

what's further unusual is that in the index the date is shown as yesterday, despite being a date in the future.

in defence of the date handling code, i don't know how someone could have thought that localizing the Date: header would be a smart idea, so i am not surprised, that the parser falls over. but there is a difference between not being able to read a date, and reading it wrongly. i don't think there is any point in trying to get these dates right. i'd consider them unparseable and treat them just like mails with the date missing.

[gauteh]

Agreed.. This is a another field where we are bumping our head against the deprecated RMail library, surely the newer Mail-library would handle it better, #127.