MBOX-Line: From witold.krecicki at firma.o2.pl  Fri Jun 11 17:51:24 2010
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Witold =?utf-8?q?Kr=C4=99cicki?= <witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:44 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] IMAP MOVE extension
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1006111725170.662@hsinghsing.panda.com>
References: <201006110854.37969.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
	<201006120159.05366.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1006111725170.662@hsinghsing.panda.com>
Message-ID: <201006120251.24779.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>

On Saturday 12 of June 2010 02:27:33 Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010, Witold Kr?cicki wrote:
> >> It's been discussed multiple times in the past (oh, why does no one
> >> actually read the archives?) how to implement the Trash Can UI on top of
> >> the IMAP \deleted+EXPUNGE model.  And guess what, that can do something
> >> the "trash can is a mailbox" model can't: undelete restores the message
> >> to its original place in the mailbox.
> > 
> > And still there is no working implementation of this model. Wonder why...
> 
> You don't seriously intend to say that nobody uses undelete in IMAP?
They use it, mostly by means of moving the messages back from trash to the 
respective mailbox. 
Most of clients use EXPUNGE instead of UID EXPUNGE and trash all of the 
messages that would otherwise be undeletable.
> If you do believe that, then you are wrong.  I know of multiple clients,
> including at least one with millions of users, that have undelete as
> Philip describes.
Name at least the one with millions of users.
-- 
Witold Kr?cicki

Grupa o2 Sp??ka z o.o., ul. Jutrzenki 177, 02-231 Warszawa,
KRS 0000140518, S?d Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy, 
Kapita? zak?adowy 377.298,00 z?., NIP 521-31-11-513

