On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Joel Reicher wrote:
If I am sure none of my users will work around the server to create a child of INBOX is there anything wrong with imapd reporting \NoInferiors for INBOX unconditionally? I can see the code in dummy_scan() for this.
Yes. Just pull that code that tests for a dual-use format, and do the obvious simple version.
The original code (which is what you propose reverting to) was right and should have been left alone. Someone deliberately went around the protocol-stated restriction; and then complained that his client core dumped when it got LIST results that reported a \NoInferiors INBOX along with children of INBOX. I gave in to his complaint. This email thread is my punishment for not taking a hard line and saying "no".
Sigh. -- Mark -- http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote. _______________________________________________ Imap-uw mailing list Imap-uw@u.washington.edu https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
