On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Ken Murchison wrote:Wouldn't the client know that the name exists from the output of: x LIST "" % * LIST (\Noselect) "." "foo"
That's the point. The client would have to do that extra LIST.
The presumption that you're making is that the client will always start
from the top level of hierarchy and go down. I'm trying to explain that
this is not necessarily a valid presumption.
Still, why is the "foo/" reply necessary? It gives client information about foo's current flags and confirms that foo exists. For what is either one of these needed? What if foo doesn't exist, is it then not allowed to go down the hierarchy to next existing directory? Or maybe the client would automatically figure out that the directory is gone and it'd try to go to next existing directory?
Assuming there's some good reason why "foo/" is useful - why wouldn't it be just as useful for mail stores which support dual-use mailboxes? You might just as well end up in a situation like:
1 LIST "" foo/bar* * LIST () "/" "foo/bar" * LIST () "/" "foo/bar/baz" 1 OK .. you do something while some other client deletes baz mailbox .. n LIST "" "foo/bar/%" n OK
