On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> The fact is that I do not need to fetch the message list but only the
> count of messages. But I still want the count of messages because the
> user wants to know if there are new or unread messages before he knows
> if it is worth fetching the list of me
Mark Crispin wrote :
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH [iso-8859-1] Vi?t Ho? wrote:
> > I feel like this is a limitation in the specification due to the fact
> > that one implementation (maybe the reference implementation) will do
> > that this way even if the mailbox is already selected :
>
> An IMAP
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> The definition of RECENT messages after a NOOP could be used.
> I mean since the last time we got a RECENT unsollicited response (or
> sollicited).
What is recent in the selected mailbox has no relationship to what is
recent in a STATUS done by any other
Timo Sirainen wrote :
> On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 15:06, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> > the STATUS command SHOULD NOT be used on the currently selected mailbox.
> >
> > I do not see why it exists since the following statement exists :
>
> One problem is at least recent-counter. Do you return the number of
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH [iso-8859-1] Vi$Bj(Bt Ho$B`(B wrote:
(B> I feel like this is a limitation in the specification due to the fact
(B> that one implementation (maybe the reference implementation) will do
(B> that this way even if the mailbox is already selected :
(B
(BAn IMAP client
Mark Crispin wrote :
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> > But don't you think there is some waste of bandwidth using SEARCH
> > instead of STATUS to get the number of UNSEEN messages ?
>
> If that is be anything other than a trivial consideration, there are other
> conditions in the se
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> But don't you think there is some waste of bandwidth using SEARCH
> instead of STATUS to get the number of UNSEEN messages ?
If that is be anything other than a trivial consideration, there are other
conditions in the selected mailbox which are simple to
On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 15:06, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> the STATUS command SHOULD NOT be used on the currently selected mailbox.
>
> I do not see why it exists since the following statement exists :
One problem is at least recent-counter. Do you return the number of
\recent messages as seen by the cu
Mark Crispin wrote :
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> > I was wondering why there was such as statement in the RFC :
> > the STATUS command SHOULD NOT be used on the currently selected mailbox.
>
> All the information from STATUS can be obtained from the state of the
> currently sele
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
> I was wondering why there was such as statement in the RFC :
> the STATUS command SHOULD NOT be used on the currently selected mailbox.
All the information from STATUS can be obtained from the state of the
currently selected mailbox. Any implementor who
I having a break in some café, drinking wine, eating foie gras, and with
my friend, I was wondering why there was such as statement in the RFC :
6.3.10. Page 43 :
<<
the STATUS command SHOULD NOT be used on the currently selected mailbox.
>>
I do not see why it exists since the following statem
11 matches
Mail list logo
