*Is* the mh driver "strictly IMAP semantics compiant" right now? Is the fact that a) it forgets about all the flags and b) when reusing an open connection it just forgets about all the deleted messages "strictly IMAP semantics compliant"?
Yes and yes. It properly advertises the mailbox as not having any PERMANENTFLAGS. Your client should have observed the empty PERMANENTFLAGS list and taken appropropriate action.
Would it make the situation worse to fix that behaveour?
Yes. Read the mh specification carefully, and pay close attention to the requirements in RFC 3501 section 3.1. It will probably also help to look at some mh source code (which I did when I wrote the mh driver).
The answer to your request is not a "no" that becomes a "yes" if you ask enough times. The answer is a "no" that will always be a "no".
You might "fix" it, and it might even work in your client. But presently it will break some other client. Sad experience tells me that the blame for that breakage will first be attributed to that client, and then by the author of that client to UW imapd, and only after long investigation (typically an incredible amount of time wasted by me) to your "fix".
-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
