On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 18:04 +0100, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 17:33 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > And thanks for not (yet) making it reject the invalid command with the > > 1:* in it > > I changed it in v2.0. > > > -- I'll need to come up with a strategy for migrating to the > > 'correct' command on the client side, given that older versions of > > dovecot won't accept it. > > > > I'll probably make the Evolution client code start off by trying the > > correct command, and then retry with the bogus '1:*' if that fails. > > Can't you simply send 1:<last uid you've seen>?
I *might* be able to get away with that, and fetch flags for any newer messages at the same time as I fetch the headers for those messages. I'll check. > Or if you want flags for messages you haven't even seen yet, > 1:4294967295 should work too. 1:4294967295 doesn't really fill me with joy either -- that assumes that a UID is limited to 32 bits unsigned... and that other servers won't fall over when presented with that number. -- dwmw2