Re: RENAME and imap compliance

[Cyrus Daboo]

Hi Andreas,

--On Wednesday, January 22, 2003 12:58:39 PM +0100 Andreas Aardal Hanssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

| "Compliant is one thing, but bumping UIDVALIDITY for source and
| destination mailboxes when renaming means that most offline clients have
| to re-scan the folder and download headers.
|
| Which means that RENAME in practise will be _slower_ than
| create, copy, delete. So why do we need RENAME?"
|
| Most clients have to re-scan all headers when UIDVALIDITY bumps. This does
| not apply to - for instance - Pine. This scan will anyway often be slower
| than submitting CREATE, then COPY, then DELETE.

That's not true. When doing CREATE/COPY/DELETE the client still has to scan the copy destination mailbox to determine the UIDs assigned to the copied messages unless the server supports UIDPLUS (and quite a few do not). And in the case of a hierarchy rename the client would have to do CREATE/COPY/DELETE for each mailbox in the hierarchy (I would argue that users expect the hierarchical rename behaviour rather than having just the top-level mailbox renamed without the children).

--
Cyrus Daboo