Re: [Dovecot] \" character in folder name results in strange LIST
Hi Timo,
- LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "folder1"
- LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "folder2"
- LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" {9} six"wafer . OK List completed.
Note the {9} length of the following real folder name. Is this normal handling of special folder names ?
Yes.
Well, I did try other servers and e.g. on scalix I'm getting this:
- LIST (\X-DirectRef=000d7f94a4731510 \X-ModDate=20100814200222) "/" "six\"wafer"
I cannot find anything relevant in RFC3501
Mail clients do not seem to like this response.
What clients? They're buggy then.. Well, of course, way too many clients are :(
at least Thunderbird will go totally crazy when getting this kind response. (My old python scripts expecting string, not a tuple go crazy as well... :-< )
On 14.8.2010, at 21.15, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
Well, I did try other servers and e.g. on scalix I'm getting this:
- LIST (\X-DirectRef=000d7f94a4731510 \X-ModDate=20100814200222) "/" "six\"wafer"
I cannot find anything relevant in RFC3501
ABNF is the relevant part. You'll get to the literal from mailbox-list:
mailbox-list = "(" [mbx-list-flags] ")" SP (DQUOTE QUOTED-CHAR DQUOTE / nil) SP mailbox
mailbox = "INBOX" / astring
astring = 1*ASTRING-CHAR / string
string = quoted / literal
literal = "{" number "}" CRLF *CHAR8 ; Number represents the number of CHAR8s
On 08/14/2010 10:27 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 14.8.2010, at 21.15, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
Well, I did try other servers and e.g. on scalix I'm getting this:
- LIST (\X-DirectRef=000d7f94a4731510 \X-ModDate=20100814200222) "/" "six\"wafer"
I cannot find anything relevant in RFC3501 ABNF is the relevant part. You'll get to the literal from mailbox-list:
mailbox-list = "(" [mbx-list-flags] ")" SP (DQUOTE QUOTED-CHAR DQUOTE / nil) SP mailbox
mailbox = "INBOX" / astring
astring = 1*ASTRING-CHAR / string
string = quoted / literal
literal = "{" number "}" CRLF *CHAR8 ; Number represents the number of CHAR8s Ok, I see it now.
Well, it looks like at least Thunderbird v3.1.2 is buggy then. Are there any non-buggy clients anyway ...?
On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 23:36 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
Well, it looks like at least Thunderbird v3.1.2 is buggy then. Are there any non-buggy clients anyway ...?
Evolution (>=2.30.2) with the imapx back end gets it right. I know this because I fixed it myself a few weeks ago.
-- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation
On 08/19/2010 01:48 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Sat, 2010-08-14 at 23:36 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
Well, it looks like at least Thunderbird v3.1.2 is buggy then. Are there any non-buggy clients anyway ...? Evolution (>=2.30.2) with the imapx back end gets it right. I know this because I fixed it myself a few weeks ago.
Well, David, if evolution was not such an instable beast... we did few evaluations from openSuSE10.3 up to 11.2 recently, and it was a no-go, except for basic imap usage. As soon as more connectors/plugins are involved, it is a nightmare. Plus, we unfortunately want it also on Win32 Platform. I just wish it had the plugin system of TB and so many usable plugins. As of TB2, evolution looked more sexy, eye-candy, compared with TB3+lightning not anymore, maybe except for the addressbook which is rather weak in TB.
Integration with a groupware is also an important issue: few years ago, we failed getting it work properly with scalix11, now there is no chance to get it work with open-xchange 6.x - and nobody cares, it seems like the evolution development is stalled for a couple of years.
So for groupware usage in our case, there are 3 more clients left: TB (seems to be the best), kmail (also few stability issues) and outlook (but that one does not really work with IMAP...). One would not expect it is in 2010 still so hard to put together a good, opensource mail/groupware system... but we are very close now.
On Fri, 03 Sep 2010 23:30:01 +0200 Samuel Kvasnica <bugreports@list.ims.co.at> articulated:
[snip]
outlook (but that one does not really work with IMAP...)
I have several associates using the latest version of MS Office that includes Outlook. None of them have complained to me regarding Outlook's usability. I sporadically use Outlook(2007) with IMAP without any problems.
In any case, Outlook has undergone several changes: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc179110.aspx
-- Jerry ✌ Dovecot.user@seibercom.net
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
On 9/3/2010 6:19 PM, Jerry wrote:
I have several associates using the latest version of MS Office that includes Outlook. None of them have complained to me regarding Outlook's usability. I sporadically use Outlook(2007) with IMAP without any problems.
In any case, Outlook has undergone several changes: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc179110.aspx
The biggest problem now with Outlook, imo, is its reliance on WORD's totally broken HTML rendering engine (in both 2007 and 2010) instead of IE. The only possible reason I can think of why MS made this decision is to try to force people to use Office, but imo it was just stupid.
It still isn't a very good IMAP client, but 2007/2010 are much better than earlier versions.
Thunderbird has its problems as well (broken HTML composer, still bugs with the local store/cache code, etc), but it seems to be the best (IMAP client) so far.
--
Best regards,
Charles
On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 00:55:27 -0400 Charles Marcus <CMarcus@Media-Brokers.com> articulated:
On 9/3/2010 6:19 PM, Jerry wrote:
I have several associates using the latest version of MS Office that includes Outlook. None of them have complained to me regarding Outlook's usability. I sporadically use Outlook(2007) with IMAP without any problems.
In any case, Outlook has undergone several changes: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc179110.aspx
The biggest problem now with Outlook, imo, is its reliance on WORD's totally broken HTML rendering engine (in both 2007 and 2010) instead of IE. The only possible reason I can think of why MS made this decision is to try to force people to use Office, but imo it was just stupid.
You have it backwards. People use MS Word and want it to integrate seamlessly into an e-mail client, database, etc. People are not 'forced' to use MS Office. They use it because it is the best word processor in existence and it can be easily integrated into other applications easily.
It still isn't a very good IMAP client, but 2007/2010 are much better than earlier versions.
Thunderbird has its problems as well (broken HTML composer, still bugs with the local store/cache code, etc), but it seems to be the best (IMAP client) so far.
For the record, I hear more complaints regarding Thunderbird than I do concerning MS Outlook (the latest version). The 2007 version of Outlook is no longer relevant. Comparing deprecated versions of any software is a Sisyphean task.
-- Jerry ✌ Dovecot.user@seibercom.net
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
Kaufman's First Law of Party Physics: Population density is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the keg.
On 9/5/2010 7:27 AM, Jerry wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 00:55:27 -0400 Charles Marcus <CMarcus@Media-Brokers.com> articulated:
The biggest problem now with Outlook, imo, is its reliance on WORD's totally broken HTML rendering engine (in both 2007 and 2010) instead of IE. The only possible reason I can think of why MS made this decision is to try to force people to use Office, but imo it was just stupid.
You have it backwards. People use MS Word and want it to integrate seamlessly into an e-mail client, database, etc. People are not 'forced' to use MS Office. They use it because it is the best word processor in existence and it can be easily integrated into other applications easily.
None of which has anything to do with my comment, which stands:
The HTML rendering engine in Word (2007 and 2010) blows goats. MS's decision to switch from IE to Word for the Outlook (2007 and 2010) HTML rendering engine was brain-dead.
Here's just one page discussing why it is so bad:
http://www.campaignmonitor.com/blog/post/2393/microsoft-takes-email-design-b...
Thunderbird has its problems as well (broken HTML composer, still bugs with the local store/cache code, etc), but it seems to be the best (IMAP client) so far.
For the record, I hear more complaints regarding Thunderbird than I do concerning MS Outlook (the latest version). The 2007 version of Outlook is no longer relevant. Comparing deprecated versions of any software is a Sisyphean task.
Don't be silly. Market share is what counts, and 2010 still has vastly less market share than any of the others. 2000 and 2003 probably each have the largest market share.
As for being 'deprecated' (this is a misuse of the term) - Office XP (release in 2002) is still not officially end of (extended) life, much less 2003 or 2007.
This is getting way OT though...
--
Best regards,
Charles
On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 17:15:10 -0400 Charles Marcus <CMarcus@Media-Brokers.com> articulated:
On 9/5/2010 7:27 AM, Jerry wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 00:55:27 -0400 Charles Marcus <CMarcus@Media-Brokers.com> articulated:
The biggest problem now with Outlook, imo, is its reliance on WORD's totally broken HTML rendering engine (in both 2007 and 2010) instead of IE. The only possible reason I can think of why MS made this decision is to try to force people to use Office, but imo it was just stupid.
You have it backwards. People use MS Word and want it to integrate seamlessly into an e-mail client, database, etc. People are not 'forced' to use MS Office. They use it because it is the best word processor in existence and it can be easily integrated into other applications easily.
None of which has anything to do with my comment, which stands:
The HTML rendering engine in Word (2007 and 2010) blows goats. MS's decision to switch from IE to Word for the Outlook (2007 and 2010) HTML rendering engine was brain-dead.
You stated: "force people to use Office". I simply pointed out that, that is not true. They were all ready using Office. Switching between IE & Office by Microsoft is a subjective evaluation.
Here's just one page discussing why it is so bad:
http://www.campaignmonitor.com/blog/post/2393/microsoft-takes-email-design-b...
Thunderbird has its problems as well (broken HTML composer, still bugs with the local store/cache code, etc), but it seems to be the best (IMAP client) so far.
For the record, I hear more complaints regarding Thunderbird than I do concerning MS Outlook (the latest version). The 2007 version of Outlook is no longer relevant. Comparing deprecated versions of any software is a Sisyphean task.
Don't be silly. Market share is what counts, and 2010 still has vastly less market share than any of the others. 2000 and 2003 probably each have the largest market share.
It was only recently released. Give it time.
As for being 'deprecated' (this is a misuse of the term) - Office XP (release in 2002) is still not officially end of (extended) life, much less 2003 or 2007.
Whether or not it is officially "end of life" is immaterial. The older versions have been deprecated by the release of "Office 2010".
This is getting way OT though...
I agree! I will discuss if OL if you want.
-- Jerry ✌ Dovecot.user@seibercom.net
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
The best laid plans of mice and men are held up in the legal department.
On 9/5/2010 6:08 PM, Jerry wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 17:15:10 -0400 Charles Marcus <CMarcus@Media-Brokers.com> articulated:
On 9/5/2010 7:27 AM, Jerry wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 00:55:27 -0400 Charles Marcus <CMarcus@Media-Brokers.com> articulated: The HTML rendering engine in Word (2007 and 2010) blows goats. MS's decision to switch from IE to Word for the Outlook (2007 and 2010) HTML rendering engine was brain-dead.
You stated: "force people to use Office". I simply pointed out that, that is not true. They were all ready using Office.
Who says? We have never used MSO in our offices (with the exception of our Accountants), so when MS made this switch, they effectively would have killed HTML rendering in Outlook - had we been using it. Or... maybe you aren't aware that you can buy Outlook by itself, or that many Exchange hosting companies provide 'free' copies of Outlook for every licensed user of their service?
And what I meant was: 'force people to use office (guess I should have been more precise and said 'MS Word') *if* they want to be able to view HTML emails'... I thought that was rather obvious.
Switching between IE & Office by Microsoft is a subjective evaluation.
Absolutely wrong. The difference in html rendering quality between the two is HUGE - especially since IE8 was released.
Market share is what counts, and 2010 still has vastly less market share than any of the others. 2000 and 2003 probably each have the largest market share.
It was only recently released. Give it time.
Even if it had 90% of the market share, Office 2007 and even 2003/XP would still not be 'deprecated'...
Whether or not it is officially "end of life" is immaterial. The older versions have been deprecated by the release of "Office 2010".
No, they haven't - you apparently don't know what 'deprecated' means.
This is getting way OT though...
I agree! I will discuss if OL if you want.
No need/point... it is irrelevant, so I won't say any more on the subject...
--
Best regards,
Charles
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 23:30 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
Well, David, if evolution was not such an instable beast... we did few evaluations from openSuSE10.3 up to 11.2 recently, and it was a no-go, except for basic imap usage. As soon as more connectors/plugins are involved, it is a nightmare. Plus, we unfortunately want it also on Win32 Platform.
Yeah, I've often hated Evolution, but only stayed with it out of inertia. I'm a lot happier with the 2.30.3 release, and will be even happier with 2.32 when it comes out. There have been a lot of improvements.
Did you file bugs? The Evolution team seem to be a lot better these days than they used to be, and bugs do actually get looked at.
-- dwmw2
On 08/14/2010 10:27 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 14.8.2010, at 21.15, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
Well, I did try other servers and e.g. on scalix I'm getting this:
- LIST (\X-DirectRef=000d7f94a4731510 \X-ModDate=20100814200222) "/" "six\"wafer"
I cannot find anything relevant in RFC3501 ABNF is the relevant part. You'll get to the literal from mailbox-list:
mailbox-list = "(" [mbx-list-flags] ")" SP (DQUOTE QUOTED-CHAR DQUOTE / nil) SP mailbox
mailbox = "INBOX" / astring
astring = 1*ASTRING-CHAR / string
string = quoted / literal
literal = "{" number "}" CRLF *CHAR8 ; Number represents the number of CHAR8s
Timo, it was probably a bad diagnosis of mine: seems like I'm getting currently errors in Thunderbird for ANY folder name when trying to delete or rename it. It is most likely since I switched to LAYOUT=fs.
This is the IMAP conversation of folder deletion using old dovecot v1.2 setup + normal maildir (it works ok):
8 OK Idle completed. 9 list "" "aaa/*" 9 OK List completed. 10 close 10 OK Close completed. 11 rename "aaa" "Trash/aaa" 11 OK Rename completed. 12 subscribe "Trash/aaa" 12 OK Subscribe completed. 13 unsubscribe "aaa" 13 OK Unsubscribe completed.
An this is with recent dovecot 2.0_ 3cda9f2f48bd + LAYOUT=fs (LIST broken hence error on subscribe commands)
6 OK Idle completed. 7 list "" "aaa/*"
- LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "aaa/" <=== WHY ? 7 OK List completed. 8 close 8 OK Close completed. 9 rename "aaa" "Trash/aaa" 9 OK Rename completed. 10 subscribe "Trash/aaa" 10 OK Subscribe completed. 11 unsubscribe "aaa" 11 OK Unsubscribe completed. 12 subscribe "Trash/aaa/" 12 NO Invalid mailbox name: Trash/aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR 13 unsubscribe "aaa/" 13 NO Invalid mailbox name: aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR
On 15.8.2010, at 7.54, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
12 subscribe "Trash/aaa/" 12 NO Invalid mailbox name: Trash/aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR 13 unsubscribe "aaa/" 13 NO Invalid mailbox name: aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR
Set:
imap_client_workarounds = tb-extra-mailbox-sep
On 08/15/2010 02:24 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 15.8.2010, at 7.54, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
12 subscribe "Trash/aaa/" 12 NO Invalid mailbox name: Trash/aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR 13 unsubscribe "aaa/" 13 NO Invalid mailbox name: aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR Set:
imap_client_workarounds = tb-extra-mailbox-sep
no, that does not help at all (and I'm using maildir, not mbox). The problem is the LIST command for "aaa/*" lists not only the children of "aaa" but also the parent folder "aaa" itself which confuses the client which is trying to move/resubcribe all children as well. This got broken either with v2.0 or with my change to LAYOUT=fs.
On 08/15/2010 02:24 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 15.8.2010, at 7.54, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
12 subscribe "Trash/aaa/" 12 NO Invalid mailbox name: Trash/aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR 13 unsubscribe "aaa/" 13 NO Invalid mailbox name: aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR Set:
imap_client_workarounds = tb-extra-mailbox-sep
just swapped shortly back to non-fs maildir layout for a test - that one works normally. So there must be a bug in layout=fs implementation, it is listing the parent directory as child !
On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 16:50 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
12 subscribe "Trash/aaa/" 12 NO Invalid mailbox name: Trash/aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR 13 unsubscribe "aaa/" 13 NO Invalid mailbox name: aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR Set:
imap_client_workarounds = tb-extra-mailbox-sep
just swapped shortly back to non-fs maildir layout for a test - that one works normally. So there must be a bug in layout=fs implementation, it is listing the parent directory as child !
It's not really a bug, it's a feature.. Whether it's a good feature is less clear. This is anyway what UW-IMAP also does, and what (Al)Pine wants. And this exact same bug has existed for a long time with Doveocot +mbox. The tb-extra-mailbox-sep workaround has fixed it for other people previously..
On 08/17/2010 07:22 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
12 subscribe "Trash/aaa/" 12 NO Invalid mailbox name: Trash/aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR 13 unsubscribe "aaa/" 13 NO Invalid mailbox name: aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR Set:
imap_client_workarounds = tb-extra-mailbox-sep
just swapped shortly back to non-fs maildir layout for a test - that one works normally. So there must be a bug in layout=fs implementation, it is listing the parent directory as child ! It's not really a bug, it's a feature.. Whether it's a good feature is less clear. This is anyway what UW-IMAP also does, and what (Al)Pine wants. And this exact same bug has existed for a long time with Doveocot +mbox. The tb-extra-mailbox-sep workaround has fixed it for other people
On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 16:50 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote: previously..
Well, given the fact it is listed ONLY if using LAYOUT=fs (if using normal maildir layout it works correclty) it IS definitely a dovecot bug. Whatever the correct behavior is, the result should not depend on setting LAYOUT=fs => this is not consistent.
With this bug, I absolutely cannot operate thunderbirds on dovecot in such setup (delete, move, rename wont work), so again a big showstopper. :-(
imap_client_workaround does not seem to be related, at least not with maildir + Layout=fs
I'm debugging it right now, and it seems very strange, I think theres a nasty bug hidden there...
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 19:31 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
Well, given the fact it is listed ONLY if using LAYOUT=fs (if using normal maildir layout it works correclty) it IS definitely a dovecot bug. Whatever the correct behavior is, the result should not depend on setting LAYOUT=fs => this is not consistent.
There are other differences between LAYOUT=fs and LAYOUT=maildir++, not just that one. I guess ideally there wouldn't be any, but for now LAYOUT=maildir++ works the way Courier/Cyrus does, and LAYOUT=fs works the way UW-IMAP does. I'm not going to change that at least before v2.1.
With this bug, I absolutely cannot operate thunderbirds on dovecot in such setup (delete, move, rename wont work), so again a big showstopper. :-(
imap_client_workaround does not seem to be related, at least not with maildir + Layout=fs
What errors does it give with that workaround enabled? Because it should have fixed your previous errors:
12 subscribe "Trash/aaa/" 12 NO Invalid mailbox name: Trash/aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR 13 unsubscribe "aaa/" 13 NO Invalid mailbox name: aaa/ <=== non-existing child folder, ERROR
x subscribe Trash/aa/ x OK Subscribe completed.
x unsubscribe Trash/aa/ x OK Unsubscribe completed. x delete Trash/aa/
x OK Delete completed. x subscribe Trash/aa/ x NO Mailbox doesn't exist: Trash/aa
On 08/17/2010 07:40 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
There are other differences between LAYOUT=fs and LAYOUT=maildir++, not just that one. I guess ideally there wouldn't be any, but for now LAYOUT=maildir++ works the way Courier/Cyrus does, and LAYOUT=fs works the way UW-IMAP does. I'm not going to change that at least before v2.1.
With this bug, I absolutely cannot operate thunderbirds on dovecot in such setup (delete, move, rename wont work), so again a big showstopper. :-(
imap_client_workaround does not seem to be related, at least not with maildir + Layout=fs What errors does it give with that workaround enabled? Because it should have fixed your previous errors: The workaround does not seem to change anything, the parent directory is still listed and Thunderbird gets confused. E.g. during move It first moves the folder and then tries to re-subscribe all its subfolders. But it got the old parent directory
Thats very, very bad for us, but of course, its your free decision. Actually this should be automaticaly tested by a test-suite for (almost)every config combination and give always consistent results. listed as subfolder before. So it will fail while trying to resubscribe that one, generate an error message and gui won't update correctly.
If this workaround should work, switching it on must prevent listing the parent directory. But that does not seem to happen currently (or I'm doing something wrong...)
... I got down to fs_list_next() in mailbox-list-fs-iter.c which returns wrong info... if nothing helps I do my own patch...
On 08/17/2010 07:40 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
What errors does it give with that workaround enabled? Because it should have fixed your previous errors:
Timo, just a short additional notice: I looked at your code around the WORKAROUND_TB_EXTRA_MAILBOX_SEP and it is NOT related in any way to the bug I observe. It is about trailing separator on subscriptions but the bug I observe is about misbehaving LIST command for argument "folder/*" which causes failed resubscription of the subfolders due to parent folder not found.
I think this is really a critical issue with LAYOUT=fs preventing many clients to work correctly.
It might be related to combination of LAYOUT=fs and DIRNAME=xxx which I must use, but not sure.
On 17.8.2010, at 21.51, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
On 08/17/2010 07:40 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
What errors does it give with that workaround enabled? Because it should have fixed your previous errors:
Timo, just a short additional notice: I looked at your code around the WORKAROUND_TB_EXTRA_MAILBOX_SEP and it is NOT related in any way to the bug I observe. It is about trailing separator on subscriptions
Yes.
but the bug I observe is about misbehaving LIST command for argument "folder/*" which causes failed resubscription of the subfolders due to parent folder not found.
Can you be more specific? What commands does TB send to Dovecot and what does Dovecot reply?
I think this is really a critical issue with LAYOUT=fs preventing many clients to work correctly.
It's been working that way for over 2 years, so it can't be all that critical for many people. Also UW-IMAP has been working that way for a longer time.
It might be related to combination of LAYOUT=fs and DIRNAME=xxx which I must use, but not sure.
I did a couple of tests, and it worked as I expected.
On 08/17/2010 11:58 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
but the bug I observe is about
misbehaving LIST command for argument "folder/*" which causes failed resubscription of the subfolders due to parent folder not found. Can you be more specific? What commands does TB send to Dovecot and what does Dovecot reply? Well, at least the TB3.1.2 relies fully on the result of LIST "folder/*" command, expecting to get only its children listed. But gets the parent dir along with children in the response. That breaks somewhat the following automatic resubscription process and that might be related to the additional trailing-separator issue.
But you were right, that workaround helps really. During my test, I simply added that line to dovecot config and restarted dovecot. That is not enough, Thunderbird client MUST BE RESTARTED as well ! Otherwise error messages continue...
Another workaround is to check "Show only subscribed folders" under Server Setting/Advanced in Thunderbird. Using that, Thunderbird will deploy only the LSUB command and that seems to work bugfree, even for Maildir with no workaround setting ! So it is consistent even with itself withing maildir mode.
This is a very nasty mess. If there are some ancient clients like pine or whatever we used on vt100 in the 90th that need broken LIST command, there should be a workaround setting for that. But currently, we use a workaround setting to get the expected standard behavior, thats really bad.
<squirt-mode> On one hand, you push people to comply with standards regarding imap capabilities in v2.0, on the other hand the essential LIST command is just messy and inconsistent. </squirt-mode>
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:48 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
This is a very nasty mess. If there are some ancient clients like pine or whatever we used on vt100 in the 90th that need broken LIST command, there should be a workaround setting for that. But currently, we use a workaround setting to get the expected standard behavior, thats really bad.
<squirt-mode> On one hand, you push people to comply with standards regarding imap capabilities in v2.0, on the other hand the essential LIST command is just messy and inconsistent. </squirt-mode>
Well, the guy who designed IMAP standard thinks the Dovecot/UW-IMAP LIST behavior is correct. I'd point you to a thread in imap-protocol mailing list but I can't find archives in web for year 2003.
I'll probably do something about this, but not before v2.1..
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:48 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
This is a very nasty mess. If there are some ancient clients like pine or whatever we used on vt100 in the 90th that need broken LIST command, there should be a workaround setting for that.
Hey! I still use pine. With mouse-in-xterm mode enabled it works really nicely on devices with a touch screen, and it makes excellent use of small screens and limited network bandwidth.
-- dwmw2
On 08/19/2010 01:43 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:48 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
This is a very nasty mess. If there are some ancient clients like pine or whatever we used on vt100 in the 90th that need broken LIST command, there should be a workaround setting for that. Hey! I still use pine. With mouse-in-xterm mode enabled it works really nicely on devices with a touch screen, and it makes excellent use of small screens and limited network bandwidth.
Sorry, did not want to start flame-war on pine... I've been using it myself for about 10 years (on POP3). But, nowadays there is no practical use: for local indoor use it is not acceptable due to its attachment handling, missing business/workgroup features like calendar etc. For the outdoor mobile use it is also a problem: most cell phones simply haven't got any ssh terminal but have own IMAP clients.
My message was rather: is it good to stick with broken implementation of server as a default just to support some ancient clients or should we change the default behavior to be consistent and use workaround to support ancient clients ?
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 22:48 +0200, Samuel Kvasnica wrote:
most cell phones simply haven't got any ssh terminal but have own IMAP clients.
Any J2ME-capable phone has an SSH client: http://www.xk72.com/midpssh/
My experience of the native IMAP clients in phones has been extremely poor. My N97 at the moment consistently fails to contact the home IMAP server (although it used to work), and gives me *no* coherent error message when it fails.
I can't remember the last time I saw a phone mail client which actually bothered to include In-Reply-To: or References: headers in replies, either.
-- dwmw2
participants (5)
-
Charles Marcus
-
David Woodhouse
-
Jerry
-
Samuel Kvasnica
-
Timo Sirainen