[jira] [Commented] (JAMES-4016) JMAP email keywords in mixed JMAP/IMAP usage
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-4016?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17832121#comment-17832121
]
Benoit Tellier commented on JAMES-4016:
---
Hi Jacopo!
No problem, I can very well do the PR:
https://github.com/apache/james-project/pull/2165
It implements strategy b).
Feel free to give it a review.
Best regards and thanks for the report!
> JMAP email keywords in mixed JMAP/IMAP usage
>
>
> Key: JAMES-4016
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-4016
> Project: James Server
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JMAP
>Reporter: Jacopo Tessera
>Assignee: Antoine Duprat
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: cyrus-keyword.log, james-keyword.log
>
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> JMAP Email keywords are currently determined as the keywords of the message
> found in the "first" mailbox (refer to
> [https://github.com/apache/james-project/blob/master/server/protocols/jmap-rfc-8621/src/main/scala/org/apache/james/jmap/mail/Email.scala#L508]).
> This approach works when using JMAP since the keywords get updated for every
> message during an Email/set operation. However, it leads to counterintuitive
> behavior when using IMAP in conjunction with JMAP (mixed JMAP/IMAP usage is a
> legitimate use case, see [https://jmap.io/spec-mail.html#introduction]).
> Consider the following scenario:
> * Assume an account with mailboxes "INBOX," "Foo," and "Bar," with the order
> of the mailboxes being "INBOX" < "Foo" < "Bar" ("INBOX" being the "first"
> mailbox when present, and "Foo" being the "first" mailbox when "INBOX" is not
> present).
> * Suppose there's a message in both the "Foo" and "Bar" mailboxes with
> keywords "foo" and "bar."
> The result of an Email/get call is as follows:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "foo": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> where and represent the IDs of the "Foo" and "Bar"
> mailboxes, respectively.
> * Using IMAP, the keyword "foo" is removed from the message in the "Bar"
> mailbox, and the keyword "baz" is added to the message in the "Bar" mailbox.
> However, the result of Email/get remains unchanged:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "foo": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> This discrepancy occurs because the flags of the message in the "Foo" mailbox
> remain unchanged, and "Foo" is considered the "first" mailbox.
> * Now, suppose the message is copied using IMAP from the "Bar" mailbox to
> the "INBOX" mailbox.
> The result of Email/get is now:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "baz": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> Hence, copying a message to another mailbox can entirely change the keywords
> of a message.
> This behavior is not specific to the copy operation, one can think of other
> scenarios where moving or deleting message on IMAP produces an unexpected
> result.
> h3. Proposed Solutions:
> * strategy a) The set of keywords for a JMAP message should be the
> intersection of the keywords of all messages across every mailbox. In other
> words, a JMAP message should have a keyword if and only if every message has
> that keyword. This ensures the stability of a JMAP message's keywords when
> issuing IMAP updates that do not affect the keywords. The behavior remains
> unchanged when using JMAP exclusively.
> * strategy b) The set of keywords for a JMAP message should be the union of
> the keywords of all messages across every mailbox. In other words, a JMAP
> message should have a keyword if at least a message has that keyword. The
> behavior remains unchanged when using JMAP exclusively.
> h3. What Does Cyrus Do?
> Based on the results in the attachments Cyrus seems to use the strategy b),
> but they consider the $seen flag as a special case.
> Their implementation can be found here
> [https://github.com/cyrusimap/cyrus-imapd/blob/master/imap/jmap_mail.c#L6394]
> h3. Extra
> The results of this scenario on Apache JAMES and cyrus-imapd can be found in
> the attachments.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (JAMES-4016) JMAP email keywords in mixed JMAP/IMAP usage
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-4016?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17831699#comment-17831699
]
Jacopo Tessera commented on JAMES-4016:
---
Hi Benoit,
unfortunately I have little experience in Scala development (as in no
experience at all)
> JMAP email keywords in mixed JMAP/IMAP usage
>
>
> Key: JAMES-4016
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-4016
> Project: James Server
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JMAP
>Reporter: Jacopo Tessera
>Assignee: Antoine Duprat
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: cyrus-keyword.log, james-keyword.log
>
>
> JMAP Email keywords are currently determined as the keywords of the message
> found in the "first" mailbox (refer to
> [https://github.com/apache/james-project/blob/master/server/protocols/jmap-rfc-8621/src/main/scala/org/apache/james/jmap/mail/Email.scala#L508]).
> This approach works when using JMAP since the keywords get updated for every
> message during an Email/set operation. However, it leads to counterintuitive
> behavior when using IMAP in conjunction with JMAP (mixed JMAP/IMAP usage is a
> legitimate use case, see [https://jmap.io/spec-mail.html#introduction]).
> Consider the following scenario:
> * Assume an account with mailboxes "INBOX," "Foo," and "Bar," with the order
> of the mailboxes being "INBOX" < "Foo" < "Bar" ("INBOX" being the "first"
> mailbox when present, and "Foo" being the "first" mailbox when "INBOX" is not
> present).
> * Suppose there's a message in both the "Foo" and "Bar" mailboxes with
> keywords "foo" and "bar."
> The result of an Email/get call is as follows:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "foo": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> where and represent the IDs of the "Foo" and "Bar"
> mailboxes, respectively.
> * Using IMAP, the keyword "foo" is removed from the message in the "Bar"
> mailbox, and the keyword "baz" is added to the message in the "Bar" mailbox.
> However, the result of Email/get remains unchanged:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "foo": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> This discrepancy occurs because the flags of the message in the "Foo" mailbox
> remain unchanged, and "Foo" is considered the "first" mailbox.
> * Now, suppose the message is copied using IMAP from the "Bar" mailbox to
> the "INBOX" mailbox.
> The result of Email/get is now:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "baz": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> Hence, copying a message to another mailbox can entirely change the keywords
> of a message.
> This behavior is not specific to the copy operation, one can think of other
> scenarios where moving or deleting message on IMAP produces an unexpected
> result.
> h3. Proposed Solutions:
> * strategy a) The set of keywords for a JMAP message should be the
> intersection of the keywords of all messages across every mailbox. In other
> words, a JMAP message should have a keyword if and only if every message has
> that keyword. This ensures the stability of a JMAP message's keywords when
> issuing IMAP updates that do not affect the keywords. The behavior remains
> unchanged when using JMAP exclusively.
> * strategy b) The set of keywords for a JMAP message should be the union of
> the keywords of all messages across every mailbox. In other words, a JMAP
> message should have a keyword if at least a message has that keyword. The
> behavior remains unchanged when using JMAP exclusively.
> h3. What Does Cyrus Do?
> Based on the results in the attachments Cyrus seems to use the strategy b),
> but they consider the $seen flag as a special case.
> Their implementation can be found here
> [https://github.com/cyrusimap/cyrus-imapd/blob/master/imap/jmap_mail.c#L6394]
> h3. Extra
> The results of this scenario on Apache JAMES and cyrus-imapd can be found in
> the attachments.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
[jira] [Commented] (JAMES-4016) JMAP email keywords in mixed JMAP/IMAP usage
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-4016?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17828323#comment-17828323
]
Benoit Tellier commented on JAMES-4016:
---
Hello Jacopo,
Long overdue response here,
Fully agree with you.
FYI we do have this "keyword merging feature" implemented and tested on top of
JMAP draft CF
https://github.com/apache/james-project/blob/master/server/protocols/jmap-draft-integration-testing/jmap-draft-integration-testing-common/src/test/resources/cucumber/ImapKeywordsConsistency.feature
Somehow, sadly it did not make it into the main JMAP specification.
We should definitly plan to adopt a similar behaviour onto the RFC-8621
implementation ASAP.
Would this be something you would be interested to contribute?
> JMAP email keywords in mixed JMAP/IMAP usage
>
>
> Key: JAMES-4016
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-4016
> Project: James Server
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JMAP
>Reporter: Jacopo Tessera
>Assignee: Antoine Duprat
>Priority: Major
> Attachments: cyrus-keyword.log, james-keyword.log
>
>
> JMAP Email keywords are currently determined as the keywords of the message
> found in the "first" mailbox (refer to
> [https://github.com/apache/james-project/blob/master/server/protocols/jmap-rfc-8621/src/main/scala/org/apache/james/jmap/mail/Email.scala#L508]).
> This approach works when using JMAP since the keywords get updated for every
> message during an Email/set operation. However, it leads to counterintuitive
> behavior when using IMAP in conjunction with JMAP (mixed JMAP/IMAP usage is a
> legitimate use case, see [https://jmap.io/spec-mail.html#introduction]).
> Consider the following scenario:
> * Assume an account with mailboxes "INBOX," "Foo," and "Bar," with the order
> of the mailboxes being "INBOX" < "Foo" < "Bar" ("INBOX" being the "first"
> mailbox when present, and "Foo" being the "first" mailbox when "INBOX" is not
> present).
> * Suppose there's a message in both the "Foo" and "Bar" mailboxes with
> keywords "foo" and "bar."
> The result of an Email/get call is as follows:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "foo": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> where and represent the IDs of the "Foo" and "Bar"
> mailboxes, respectively.
> * Using IMAP, the keyword "foo" is removed from the message in the "Bar"
> mailbox, and the keyword "baz" is added to the message in the "Bar" mailbox.
> However, the result of Email/get remains unchanged:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "foo": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> This discrepancy occurs because the flags of the message in the "Foo" mailbox
> remain unchanged, and "Foo" is considered the "first" mailbox.
> * Now, suppose the message is copied using IMAP from the "Bar" mailbox to
> the "INBOX" mailbox.
> The result of Email/get is now:
> {code:json}
> {
> ...
> "mailboxIds": { "": true, "": true, "": true },
> "keywords": {
> "baz": true,
> "bar": true
> }
> }
> {code}
> Hence, copying a message to another mailbox can entirely change the keywords
> of a message.
> This behavior is not specific to the copy operation, one can think of other
> scenarios where moving or deleting message on IMAP produces an unexpected
> result.
> h3. Proposed Solutions:
> * strategy a) The set of keywords for a JMAP message should be the
> intersection of the keywords of all messages across every mailbox. In other
> words, a JMAP message should have a keyword if and only if every message has
> that keyword. This ensures the stability of a JMAP message's keywords when
> issuing IMAP updates that do not affect the keywords. The behavior remains
> unchanged when using JMAP exclusively.
> * strategy b) The set of keywords for a JMAP message should be the union of
> the keywords of all messages across every mailbox. In other words, a JMAP
> message should have a keyword if at least a message has that keyword. The
> behavior remains unchanged when using JMAP exclusively.
> h3. What Does Cyrus Do?
> Based on the results in the attachments Cyrus seems to use the strategy b),
> but they consider the $seen flag as a special case.
> Their implementation can be found here
> [https://github.com/cyrusimap/cyrus-imapd/blob/master/imap/jmap_mail.c#L6394]
> h3. Extra
> The results of this scenario on Apache JAMES and cyrus-imapd can be found in
> the attachments.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands,
