On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 01:27:13AM -0300, Igor Almeida wrote: > Yeah, I had to do some digging to find this. But the patch was mostly for > testing and feedback. And to remember the discussion we had a few years ago > (!) > about eventually getting to this part. > > For example, at some point we talked about checking PERMANENTFLAGS for > permission to store keywords and create new ones, but I don't understand the > protocol (and the code) enough to find where this would go.
I couldn't find this discussion. > By the way, what is the plan for py3? I remember there was pull request at > some point. Yes, there's been 3 attemps to port offlineimap to py3. All failed. > It will break, yes. > If the source side is IMAP too, we enter the except block. At this point we > could > set `flagstring` to `imaputil.flagsmaildir2imap(flags))`, which would revert > to the original code. > Also, if both servers are modern enough, there shouldn't be a need for > translating between their keyword representations... I didn't check what would be the best. Why coulnd't just ignore this error? > Well, at least RF3501 says that `flag-keyword` (itself an `atom`) cannot have > a > space... Anyway, to prevent a problem here, maybe when assembling the > keywordmap > in MaildirRepository we could raise an error. > > I don't particularly like passing the dict to this imaputil function. Maybe it > would be best to just add to the set after `imaputil.flagsmaildir2imap` > returns to `IMAPFolder.__processmessagesflags_real`. I think that raising an error should be good enough. At least, this would stop the current process and avoid doing weird things. -- Nicolas Sebrecht _______________________________________________ OfflineIMAP-project mailing list: [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/offlineimap-project OfflineIMAP homepages: - https://github.com/OfflineIMAP - http://offlineimap.org
