On Sun, 19 Nov 2006, Dan Karp wrote:
"Mark Crispin" <mrc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun Nov 19 00:04:08 2006, Dan Karp wrote:
> >> Or you could simply not return a UIDNEXT value on the VFOLDER and
> >> effectively do an "UNEXPUNGE" while the client's not looking.
> >> Clients are built defensively enough that introducing a new message
> >> whose UID isn't the highest in the mailbox will still work. (It's
> >> my secret shame -- trust me on this.)
> Any server that does this is broken. Completely, utterly, broken.
> I am highly offended by the idea that it is is "alright" for a server
> to do this because some clients may overlook this egregious violation
> of UID semantics.
Mark, the hyperbole is unnecessary. I was only being half-serious about it.
But you're still right, it's a bad idea.
Humor, sarcasm, and half-seriousness does not transmit very well in email.
The smiley ":-)" was introduced in an attempt to ameliorate the problems
brought about by ill-advised levity.
Nor is it hyperbole for someone who must deal on a daily basis with people
who seriously believe that IMAP's definitions can be so compromised,
. "blurdybloop server works fine with Outlook, therefore it's a bug in
. "blurdybloop client works fine with Courier, therefore it's a bug in
. "blurdybloop is a commercial product, therefore it's a bug in your
I had to take the comment seriously; and a serious claim that "Clients are
built defensively enough that introducing a new message whose UID isn't
the highest in the mailbox will still work" can not go unchallenged.
-- Mark --
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
lemonade mailing list