On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 10:10, Richard Bang wrote: > Hi, > > Just for my upended worth. My implementation will never return either > /Marked or /Unmarked. > > This is because when I was testing with multiple concurrent connected > clients (as I like to work) it screwed up the new message counts. I want > to have 2+ client open at once (I have 4 PC's in different locations) I > want to be able to see new mail on all of them without having to choose > which one should take priority or have any of them ignore a mailbox just > because I last looked at a folder with a different client.
This is a bug in your clients, not in your server. They are making the flawed assumption that \Unmarked means they can skip the folder -- in fact it doesn't; it means nothing to the vast majority of clients -- those which care about \Seen not \Recent status. Here I disagree with Mark's statement that it's non-constructive to make absurd interpretations of the protocol in this mailing list. The interpretation that \Unmarked status gives you an excuse for skipping STATUS on the folder in question is absurd for most clients, yet it _is_ appropriate to discuss it here. When contemplating \Marked and \Unmarked flags, I saw a problem and asked about it... others evidently just went ahead and _used_ the \Unmarked flag even though it's completely irrelevant to them. It's _that_ behaviour which is non-constructive, surely? -- dwmw2
