Moving a message from one folder to another with thunderbird, gmail-app
on android and horde webmail has always the same behaviour.
The \Recent flag ist set and the \Seen-Flag is removed in the new
folder. So it is not a problem of thunderbird.

BR Jakob

Am 04.12.18 um 17:31 schrieb Jakobus Schürz:
> This is, what the logs say, when i move a message to another folder
> with thunderbird drag&drop
>
> Dec 04 17:22:24 mymail dovecot[16982]: 
> imap(user.name)<17010><XtHsqjR8JqbV0J0m>: copy from INBOX/Arbeiten/bla: 
> box=INBOX, uid=849, msgid=<a133b9b2-6913-14e8-f509-b6c81750e...@bla.com>, 
> from=Full Name <u...@bla.com>, subject=TEST005, flags=($label3 NonJunk)
> Dec 04 17:22:24 mymail dovecot[16982]: 
> imap(user.name)<17010><XtHsqjR8JqbV0J0m>: expunge: box=INBOX/Arbeiten/bla, 
> uid=7, msgid=<a133b9b2-6913-14e8-f509-b6c81750e...@bla.com>, from=Full Name 
> <u...@bla.com>, subject=TEST005, flags=(\Seen $label3 NonJunk)
>
> So i think, there is a Problem with dovecot. Is it possible, that a
> misconfiguration causes such a behaviour?
>
> It is only the \Seen flag which is removed and obviously the
> \Recent-flag, which is set, when i move a message to another folder.
> All other Flags can i set/remove with sieve-filters.
> Maybe these flags are set correctly, but then is another process,
> which removes the \seen and sets the \recent flag on every new message
> in a folder...
>
>
> BR Jakob
>
>
>
> Am 04.12.18 um 17:02 schrieb Michael Slusarz:
>>> On December 4, 2018 at 8:48 AM Jakobus Schürz <wertsto...@nurfuerspam.de> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have an additional information.
>>>
>>> Moving a already seen messsage to another imap-folder (drag&drop in
>>> thunderbird) shows this email in the other folder as unseen and recent.
>>>
>>> Is this normal behaviour?
>> Depends on what Thunderbird is doing.  If it is doing a COPY, flags will be 
>> preserved per IMAP spec.  If it is doing an APPEND, then Thunderbird would 
>> be responsible for transferring the flags (and clearing the recent flag) to 
>> match COPY semantics.
>>
>> michael

Reply via email to