Re: [Imap-uw] Re: moving mail between folders is intermittently failing
On May 6 2010, Mark Crispin wrote: On Fri, 7 May 2010, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: loss of the state we are talking about here. it's all based on mark's postulation that a tcp connection is reliable. TCP connections are reliable. Run, don't walk, to your nearest technical bookstore and read about network layering. TCP connections are more reliable than UDP; that does not mean they are reliable, full stop. I agree that most ugly, stupid software too quickly resorts to dumping a connection. But it sounds like you're just arguing the other, equally wrong, extreme. Software that doesn't take into account that TCP connections often do either fail completely or stall for so long as to constitute a failure to, you know, a normal person who's trying to get something done interactively, is just wrong. Patience is usually but not always a virtue. -Brian ___ Imap-uw mailing list Imap-uw@u.washington.edu http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
Re: [Imap-uw] Re: moving mail between folders is intermittently failing
On May 6 2010, Mark Crispin wrote: I go to the trouble to teach you how things actually work, and you respond with a typical nihilistic Gen-X retort. Was that what you said, or was it not? It quite clearly was, so the retort was typically nothing (particularly indicative of a generation to which I do not belong). The righteous thing is to follow the specifications; and if you think that the specifications are incorrect then work to get them changed. You're the one who seems to be angrily insisting that the specifications shouldn't be followed. Oh? I'd be quite curious for you to teach me where it was that I said such. And then to make stupid statements such as TCP is not reliable. Or stupid statements such as, You're talking about failures at the application layer, but you shouldn't try to address it in the application? Pshaw. So you want to bring up Linux's half-duplex close behavior, eh? You may project anything you wish... That's irrelevant to RST in IMAP sessions. ... so that you may be comfortable in refuting it. -Brian ___ Imap-uw mailing list Imap-uw@u.washington.edu http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
Re: Re[4]: [Imap-uw] getting UID of a message copied to another mailbox?
On Apr 17 2010, Mark Crispin wrote: On Sat, 17 Apr 2010, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: MC However I do like trash model for other MC mailboxes because it allows me to keep the deleted messages if I ever need MC them again. Think about trash as being archive in this case. MC Why not create archive mailboxes for that purpose? Sorry, what's the difference? By calling something Trash, you are inviting its destruction without notice to you. Trash. n. things that you throw away because you no longer want or need them. Quote the dictionary all you want; while I agree with you in an ideal world, people have been conditioned by 25 years of GUI metaphors that say otherwise, which is why the purist recommendations are broken. Pure and simple. You might think those GUI metaphors are bad (and I would be right there agreeing with you), but our opinion is irrelevant. Some of the other assertions in this discussion are counter to what I've seen and studied in users and analysis of their mail usage, but it's all just about as irrelevant as what Merriam and Webster have to say about Trash. -Brian ___ Imap-uw mailing list Imap-uw@u.washington.edu http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
Re: [Imap-uw] Problem deleting folders with Thunderbird
On May 14 2009, Mark Crispin wrote: On Thu, 14 May 2009, Andrew Daviel wrote: 5 unsubscribe Trash/test/ 5 NO Not subscribed to mailbox Trash/test/ - at this point, Trash/test/ has disappeared from the filesystem, but there is still an entry Trash/test in .mailboxlist. Look at the above very carefully. imapd says that Trash/test/ is not subscribed. The .mailboxlist file shows that Trash/test is subscribed. Note the difference in the two strings. Just to be explicit, the moral of the story is that using subscriptions is not a good idea because every client is stupid in their handling of subs, and worse, they're all stupid in slightly different ways. -Brian ___ Imap-uw mailing list Imap-uw@u.washington.edu http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
