(Resent message w/o attachment. My original message was rejected because of the attachment.) On Wednesday February 20 14:45, Charlie Brady wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Michael Weinberger wrote: > > > > a) The unmodified UW-IMAP (with mbox format) works great. The UW-IMAP in SME > > is patched for maildir support. This patch uses the unix time stamp of every > > message as the UID. When the message is moved to another folder the UID must > > change and therefore the time stamp must change. As a result the message's > > arrival date has changed. > > The last statement is only true if the arrival date is derived from the > file time stamp. AFAICT, there is no concept of "arrival date" in the > IMAP protocol, although there is mention of it in a draft sort extension > of the IMAP protocol: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-sort-08.txt > > Here, the "arrival date" is not clearly defined, it is just the "Internal > date and time of the message".
You are right, the correct term is "internal date". Some mail clients use "arrival date", like mutt. > Using the sort extension doesn't pass the IMAP server's internal notion of > the "arrival date" down to the client, it only defines the order of > presentation of messages. If the client request a message list sorted by 'internal date', the correct sort order relies on correct internal dates. If the 'internal date' does not reflect the date of arrival the sort order is wrong. Wrong means, that it is not what user expects. > > Now the maildir format does encode the UID in the timestamp of the message > file, but the arrival time (if defined as the time when the message is > added to a maildir, which might be when the message is moved from folder > to folder), is encoded in the filename of the message file, so the IMAP > daemon is capable of sorting using filename to determine arrival order, > iirespective of timestamp. I haven't looked through the code, so I don't > know what it does. Both UW-IMAP/maildir and Courier uses the timestamp for the 'internal date' The differences between them are, that the UW must change the timestamp when the message is moved or copied to generate a new UID. The Courier maintains its own database (file courierimapuiddb) and leaves the timestamp untouched. This can result in a confusing behaviour. Example: A mail has been sent to you last week. The mail is stored in Maildir/new. Today you check your mailbox. This mail then is moved to the Maildir/cur. With UW-IMAP, the timestamp will change. If you use a mail client, which use the 'internal date' as the 'arrival date' the message appears as received today. See also my attached file. The time encoded in the filename is obviously not used. One reason could be, that the IMAP cannot rely on this. Think of direct delivery via procmail! Regards, Michael -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
