In MS Outlook, actual deletion from the imap server is a two-step process.
First, the item is marked for deletion.  Here the message is not really gone
because it can be undeleted.  While marked for deletion, however, it can be
hidden from view such that the user can pretend as if it really deleted.
This is useful because it allows you to hold-on to messages you may need
later, but are reluctant to delete.  This is why I like imap.

When one truly wants to delete a message in MS Outlook, the "purge" command
is chosen whereupon all messages on the imap server that happen to be marked
for deletion are purged, i.e., truly deleted and gone forever.  I use purge
when my server space quota is approached.

Is mutt capable of simulating this behavior; does it retain the "marked for
deletion" and "purged" distinction?  So far, mutt takes my messages off of
the imap server, and is so impolite that it does *not* leave a copy for
future reference.  I.e., there is nothing left to purge.

I perused and I did
not see that mutt follows the MS Outlook conventions I described.  I saw
"mh_purge" is related to "renaming deleted messages," but it's not clear if
this is what I am referring to.

Can someone please speak to this?


Reply via email to