MBOX-Line: From slusarz at curecanti.org  Fri May 20 10:26:08 2011
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Michael M Slusarz <slusarz@curecanti.org>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:46 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Thoughts on keyword improvements/enhancements
In-Reply-To: <4DD60CE3.3020502@fastmail.fm>
References: <20110518011645.Horde.6sTkboF5lbhN03Jd3XNndCA@bigworm.curecanti.org>
	<BANLkTikVbKdXg01nnajJ-=XLNfTpjjjG0Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1105181108180.24932@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<20110518210716.GA12636@brong.net>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1105181519330.24932@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<20110519045851.GA23466@brong.net>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1105182203320.24932@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<20110519220352.GA12141@brong.net>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1105191513210.24932@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<20110520002607.Horde.lf1bSoF5lbhN1gl-aoNHDLA@bigworm.curecanti.org>
	<4DD60CE3.3020502@fastmail.fm>
Message-ID: <20110520112608.Horde.uJMkL4F5lbhN1qQwcI33DLA@bigworm.curecanti.org>

Quoting Greg Banks <gnb@fastmail.fm>:

> On 20/05/11 16:26, Michael M Slusarz wrote:
>>
>>
>> Finally, and this might be overkill, but possibly implement some  
>> sort of MODSEQ-like counter to track label changes.  When labels  
>> change, the MODSEQ-like number is incremented.  This would allow a  
>> client to skip synchronizing the label list on every login if not  
>> needed.  However, given that the number of labels in general might  
>> be limited (most people use no more than 5-10?), the cost might  
>> outweigh the benefit.
>>
>
> If your new labels are set via the STORE/UID STORE commands, then  
> RFC4551 says that setting them must update MODSEQ.  So your  
> MODSEQ-like counter already exists.

I guess I did not make myself clear.  The MODSEQ-ish value wasn't to  
catch label changes on messages.  It would be intended to catch label  
definition changes on a server.

The problem with looking at CONDSTORE MODSEQs is that you could  
perform all sorts of commands that will change this value that have  
nothing to do with label definition changes.  So MODSEQs become  
useless for a client to determine whether it needs to update its list  
of label definitions from the server.

This particular proposal seems lamer the more I think about it.

michael


