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.


Reply via email to