------ Original Message ------
From: "Timo Sirainen" <[email protected]>
To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Jan Kundrát" <[email protected]>;"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: 2/06/2012 11:06:06 a.m.
Subject: Re: [imap5] Should unsolicited EXPUNGE responses be returned
during UID MOVE?
On 2.6.2012, at 1.59, Adrien W. de Croy wrote:
When my client sees an EXPUNGE, it removes the message from its cache,
almost immediately. If the UID MOVE command sent regular EXPUNGEs
followed by regular tagged OK COPYUID, my client would have lost the
cached data, effectively negating any benefits of UIDPLUS.
Either you postpone the EXPUNGEs until the tagged OK with COPYUID
arrives (which looks very un-IMAPy to me), or you somehow report the
COPYUID before the untagged EXpUNGEs *and* the tagged OK gets sent.
Or, your client could - knowing it is in a MOVE command - defer the processing
of those expunges, or actually probably ignore them, since the information
required is in the COPYUID response (tells you which messages were moved and
are therefore gone from source folder).
That's possible of course, but also pretty kludgy. IMAP in general doesn't
require clients to do such things.
The flip-side to that is that implementation design decisions shouldn't
necessarily force the protocol.
Other clients don't have this problem, so can you blame the protocol.
And anyway it shouldn't ignore them entirely, because there might be other
EXPUNGEs reported that didn't come from a MOVE.
Not sure that's possible/legal. I don't think a server is allowed to
send unsolicited EXPUNGE responses whilst in another command.
Adrien
_______________________________________________
imap5 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5
