From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/82159 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: nnmaildir vs offlineimap: patch to use flags properly Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:53:12 +0200 Message-ID: <871uitbqfr.fsf@toke.dk> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1345996505 22229 80.91.229.3 (26 Aug 2012 15:55:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 15:55:05 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M30427@lists.math.uh.edu Sun Aug 26 17:55:06 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T5fB4-0005zQ-BD for ding-account@gmane.org; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:55:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1T5f9Y-0007nE-9y; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 10:53:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1T5f9W-0007n1-6S for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 10:53:30 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1T5f9T-0000q0-UA for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 10:53:29 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1T5f9R-0003UA-TG for ding@gnus.org; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:53:25 +0200 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T5f9Q-0005Vh-Bd for ding@gnus.org; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:53:24 +0200 Original-Received: from 1809ds4-ro.0.fullrate.dk ([90.184.46.60]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:53:24 +0200 Original-Received: from toke by 1809ds4-ro.0.fullrate.dk with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:53:24 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 32 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1809ds4-ro.0.fullrate.dk User-Agent: Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:/i2Z6tP0iUR99qKgyH4dXwC3TvI= X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:82159 Archived-At: Magnus Henoch writes: > But it seems like nobody saw it, so I'm making some noise here. What do > you think about the patch? I've tried it out, and from my initial testing it appears to work quite well. I've been using a script to sync the flags back and forth on every run of offlineimap, which is sort of hit and miss. As in, there have been a few mails that are not updated. I think this has to do with the renaming of filenames that offlineimap does to keep track of files. So I had a bunch of mails that were not marked with the S flag, but which gnus considered to be seen. When enabling your patch, those turned up again, and I did not seem to be able to mark them as read. Marking them externally (in this case using Mutt) did seem to clear everything up though, and new mails are marked correctly. Moving mails around between folders also seems to work. I'll keep using this for a few days and see if anything odd turns up. Other than that, many thanks for writing this patch; I've been bothered by this for a while, but not enough to do something about it. I don't suppose there's any way to sync/store expired flags in the same way? I seem to be able to add an E flag to mails in my maildir, and offlineimap syncs it to the server, but then it seems to be discarded; at least it's removed by offlineimap on the next sync. I'm afraid I don't know enough about the imap protocol to know whether this is just because my imap server is rubbish, or whether it's expected protocol behaviour... -Toke -- Toke Høiland-Jørgensen toke@toke.dk