MBOX-Line: From tss at iki.fi  Mon Oct 31 15:18:39 2011
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:46 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] BODY.PEEK[section]<origin.size> FETCH response
In-Reply-To: <CABa8R6ugaAADsrvaS1Nnau5bi7k9728b+x00NcG1Nbxfk9xwsA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8F0DA5FA-FB07-4AFA-9C58-8F0927998343@ghoti.org>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1110301823210.9034@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<CABa8R6uyrHJ6AqQoGfMcLztG-zovaVK4FEFep8ibpYc2-6b7ig@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1110311352000.9034@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<CABa8R6ugaAADsrvaS1Nnau5bi7k9728b+x00NcG1Nbxfk9xwsA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <75E51A44-91E4-48D1-BA82-789C82583ABC@iki.fi>

On 31.10.2011, at 23.53, Brandon Long wrote:

>> If you think that Gmail's IMAP server is compliant, you are mistaken.
> 
> I know its not compliant, we even have a support page where we list
> the cases where we explicitly decided against compliance.
> Interoperability is a goal, however.  That doesn't mean we want to
> force Gmail users to use the IMAP mailbox model, however.

I haven't tested GMail with imaptest for a while now (few years?), but I don't think the bugs it reports are about the mailbox model, or anything else that can't be fixed somewhat easily. I guess the one test I could remove is the search for substrings, since even Mark doesn't think it's worth the trouble nowadays.


