21 lines
827 B
Plaintext
21 lines
827 B
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no Thu Jul 24 02:02:36 2008
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:42 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] ACLs and \Noinferiors
|
|
In-Reply-To: <1216834954.31765.790.camel@hurina>
|
|
References: <1216834954.31765.790.camel@hurina>
|
|
Message-ID: <ZG8ZBs7s5VGcrRehmhH5/w.md5@lochnagar.oryx.com>
|
|
|
|
Timo Sirainen writes:
|
|
> Any thoughts on if lack of "k" right for a mailbox without children
|
|
> should LIST it with \Noinferiors flag? If not, what about if no-one has
|
|
> "k" right for it and none is ever expected to be given?
|
|
|
|
But maybe they should be tied together differently: Granting "k" on a
|
|
\noinferiors mailbox is meaningless. It's not clear to me that setacl
|
|
should succeed if the rights grant what the server cannot do.
|
|
|
|
Arnt
|
|
|