MBOX-Line: From brong at fastmail.fm  Wed Apr  4 01:06:26 2012
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:48 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Question about FETCH command
In-Reply-To: <4F7B8913.4060308@earthlink.net>
References: <1328732126.32086.140661033971485@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<201202090820.28260.thomas@koch.ro> <4F337E61.5040702@qbik.com>
	<20120209112411.GB29734@launde.brong.net>
	<4F7B8913.4060308@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20120404080626.GA5317@launde.brong.net>

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 06:34:43PM -0500, Rick Sanders wrote:
> I'm working with an IMAP server which gives errors in response to
> what seem to me to be valid FETCH commands.

Totally not replying to you here, but here's a fine example of why
THREAD=REFERENCES is broken in the real world.  You replied to an
existing message, changed the subject, didn't strip these headers:

References: <1328732126.32086.140661033971485@webmail.messagingengine.com>
        <201202090820.28260.thomas@koch.ro> <4F337E61.5040702@qbik.com>
        <20120209112411.GB29734@launde.brong.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120209112411.GB29734@launde.brong.net>

And so you get threaded in a totally different discussion.  Yay.

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1;
        rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1

Not that it's Thunderbird's fault, necessarily.  I might suggest to
them a "you changed the subject, are you sure this is actually a
reply" type of question be asked...

Bron.

