Hi, > [Christof Drescher wrote:] > > So I'd suggest it's a server-issue like a configuration option which could > > be enabled on a per-user basis. It would be simple to answer a "STORE 1 > > (\deleted)" with some answer like "store completed...1 expunge..." and doing > > an append to a "trash can" folder in one run. > [Mark Crisping wrote:] > That is a lovely idea in theory, but it does not work in practice. Some > ding-dong will inevitably set this "option" globally without obtaining > such permission from the user (or the client) and this will break the > client expectation of how the mailbox works.
That's the problem of the "ding-dong", not the problem of the server developer. It's a bad argument to say "don't do it, because someone could misuse it". We'd never have medicine, cars or even computers with this track. > The delete-expunge model is a good thing, as is the ability to undelete by > clearing the \Deleted flag. The correct response to foolish demands for a > trash can in the server is to educate the users as to why delete-expunge > is better, and not to give in to foolishness. This is your opinion. I think delete-expunge is better as well, but I do not go as far as to say it is better for EVERYONE. And I'm doing business for customers, not for an abstract thing which does not buy me anything. If a customer asks for something stupid, I tell him that I don't think it's good. If he insists, I will do it - he's the customer. If I make it compatible with the outside, if it conforms to the protocol, and if it is clearly distinguishable for everyone - who wants to blame me? I'm in favor for an IMAP extension to allow the "client" to select the model they prefer. Default is still delete-expunge, but why not have an extension which enables an "trash-can"-mode like described? And for some period - in which this extension is not available in the clients used, a server override flag would be necessary - a flag which of course should never be set as default. Christof
