On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 12:36:11PM -0600, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> I'm giving this a try, and so far it does indeed work, but only for
> some folders. It seems to me that the folders that fail are the ones
> that have older messages.
>
can you describe that more precisely?
could it be that you are not auto-marking unread messages as non-recent
("old")? mbsync preserves such messages.
ideally, if you could produce a test case in run-tests.pl, somewhere
around X30 or X50.
> Also, is there a way to not remove the older messages? So the initial
> fetch gets MaxMessages, but later ones only sync up to MaxMessages,
> and leave the rest untouched.
>
that sounds like the exact opposite of what is currently intended: it's
trying to be a sliding window, while you seem to want a simple cut-off
with "fill up" when messages disappear.
what is the use case?
> I might give a try to hash out the issues too, is there any part of
> the code that you have an eye on?
>
the meat of the algorithm is in sync.c, box_loaded().
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
isync-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/isync-devel
