26 lines
950 B
Plaintext
26 lines
950 B
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From alexey.melnikov at isode.com Wed Sep 7 09:22:39 2005
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:36 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] SELECT of same mailbox
|
|
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSX.4.63.0509070829570.28350@pangtzu.panda.com>
|
|
References: <UsPqTMxta5Q38J/4ek2JBA.md5@bluegrass.trish.de> <5b93232d050907075812659c02@mail.google.com>
|
|
<Pine.OSX.4.63.0509070829570.28350@pangtzu.panda.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <431F13CF.6070209@isode.com>
|
|
|
|
Mark Crispin wrote:
|
|
|
|
> My preference would be either to:
|
|
> . leave the current wording as-is
|
|
> or
|
|
> . change it to an explicit statement that server behavior (and
|
|
> subsequent
|
|
> state of \Recent flags) with extraneous SELECT is undefined and
|
|
> implementation dependent.
|
|
> That way, existing servers are not declared broken, and clients are
|
|
> put on notice not to use this as a hack to clear \Recent flags.
|
|
|
|
I would prefer the latter.
|
|
|
|
|