On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 08:00:36AM +0100, DINH Viet Hoa wrote: > > Hmm. Maybe it'd work just as well without the virtual trashcan if everything > > else was there :) Currently I'm just annoyed at seeing the deleted messages > > there so I expunge them immediately (and sometimes wish I hadn't), but I'm > > afraid to just hide the deleted messages since then I'd never remember to > > expunge them. > > isn't there possibility to do some automatic expunge when selecting other > mailboxes ? (CLOSE)
Yes, but I don't really like that either. Either it still happens too fast (I changed mailbox, then figured out I didn't actually want one of the messages to be expunged after all) or it doesn't happen fast enough (I don't change the mailbox immediately and it's annoying to look at all the deleted spam). > > You always complain about some clients trying to select the same mailbox > > using multiple connections. Is this even discouraged in RFC (it's not under > > SELECT), or how would client authors know not to do it? I can think of a few > > reasons why client might want to do that (long standing or background > > operations in one, user interactive operations in another). > > Maybe the client should schedule the given operation between background > operations are user interactive operations ? Interactive operations should happen as soon as possible. With bad luck they're happening at the same time as some slow background operation (SEARCH or prefetching data for mails that are likely to be displayed soon). > > We'd really need a IMAP client implementor's guide which talks about the > Isn't there the ten commandments ? That could be a start. They aren't nearly enough. I've written some too (http://dovecot.fi/imap-client-coding-howto.html) but that's not enough either. > > I'm not saying we should depricate ENVELOPE, but I don't think it's fare to (grr. deprecate, fair)
