On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 20:16, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > > Also do you really have to return MODSEQ messageset for each SEARCH and > > SORT? You're just returning the search results twice. Why not add the MODSEQ > > into the untagged reply itself? ie. "* SEARCH 1 2 4 10 (MODSEQ 123)". Since > > client specifically asked for the MODSEQ, there's no compatibility issues. > > Actually I like the idea. > I would rather change the syntax to "* SEARCH (MODSEQ 123) 1 2 4 10", so that you > can recognize new syntax earlier in parsing.
Well, from server's point of view it'd be better to send last, so it wouldn't have to buffer all the search results before sending MODSEQ. Not that important though.
