MBOX-Line: From alexey.melnikov at isode.com  Thu Jan 24 08:21:33 2013
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:50 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Courier bug(?)
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVAobTOjLdLH++_qp=HCtdZJne5Q7TUF_P=9J6a+gg2fmQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20130121144822.Horde.kbr5Y8IKwMlD1fH1Qun9hQ1@bigworm.curecanti.org>
	<CAKHUCzwJ8xq7O8vGDHe0D9Jviac06o-QtePMhKYV7HzwzRPMPA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1358846428.12608.2.camel@hurina>
	<CAC4RtVAobTOjLdLH++_qp=HCtdZJne5Q7TUF_P=9J6a+gg2fmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51015F8D.8020300@isode.com>

On 24/01/2013 15:51, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> Assuming it was unilaterally sent FETCH and not a normal reply for
>> setting the \Seen flag by UID FETCH BODY[], I agree.
> I contend that it doesn't matter *why* the server sent the flags
> response.

Indeed.

> The flag change was caused by the FETCH BODY, but the fact
> is that your UID FETCH command did not *ask* for FLAGS, so there's
> *no* requirement that the server send the flags as part of that
> response.  And once you detach it that way, the server can do what it
> wants.
>
> If, as a client, you want to head off this situation, the way to do it
> is to ask for FLAGS in addition to BODY.

An alternative is to keep message numbers for the duration of a UID 
FETCH and correlate multiple FETCH responses that way.


