>> On Tue, 01 Aug 2006 13:53:49 -0400, Jim Pingle wrote: >> Eric Stadtherr wrote: >>> I am partially responsible for the sorting "fixes" of late, so > I'd like >>> to take part in the resolution of this one. Rev288 contains a fix > I made >>> to the code that manages the results of the server-side sorting > Although >>> the fix is working, it seems that it negatively impacted the > behavior in >>> the absence of "SORT" capability on the IMAP server. >>> >>> I believe the behavior before my fix was to simply display the > messages >>> in IMAP Message Sequence Number order (basically the order the > messages >>> arrived in the folder). I think I can come up with an easy patch > to >>> restore this behavior when "SORT" capability is absent. How does > that >>> sound? >> >> >> Sounds good to me. Hopefully it will be an easy fix! >> >> If you need me to try any patches, let me know. > > I agree, I'd rather have if fixed than making it another config > option -- also I'm open for testing patches against Dovecot, just > let me know. > > Thanks > > P >> >> Thanks, >> Jim On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 12:06:09 -0600, Eric Stadtherr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Phil, > > I'm a little confused about why you're seeing errors with > Dovecot. Dovecot is my IMAP server as well, and it sorts perfectly. > What version of Dovecot do you have? > > -Eric > On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 12:58:49 -0500, phil wrote:
dovecot-1.0.r2 - I don't see anything in dovecot.conf that deals with sorting, so I don't know how it could be on my side (but I"m happy to look further) P >> >> >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> believed to be clean > -- > http://fak3r.com - you don't have to kick it > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
