From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/71390 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Pittman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: More IMAP testing, please Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 23:30:10 +1000 Message-ID: <87vd5x3nz1.fsf@rimspace.net> References: <87ocbsuu51.fsf@andy.bu.edu> <87iq20ymof.fsf@rimspace.net> <87mxrb313t.fsf@rimspace.net> <87mxrb6nlv.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1285162524 31376 80.91.229.12 (22 Sep 2010 13:35:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:35:24 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M19763@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Sep 22 15:35:23 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OyPTm-0005rT-GJ for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:35:22 +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 1OyPTe-00020B-Cs; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 08:35:14 -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 1OyPTc-0001zs-TS for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 08:35:12 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OyPTZ-0002ST-03 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 08:35:12 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1OyPTV-0008Ez-00 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:35:05 +0200 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OyPTT-0005mE-4U for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:35:03 +0200 Original-Received: from ppp59-167-189-244.static.internode.on.net ([59.167.189.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:35:03 +0200 Original-Received: from daniel by ppp59-167-189-244.static.internode.on.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:35:03 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp59-167-189-244.static.internode.on.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:UXiDstpqvFT2057MW8ZnIqEqeWA= X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:71390 Archived-At: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: > Ted Zlatanov writes: > >> Same as now: EXPUNGE the mailbox. This is normal IMAP behavior so I >> don't think it will surprise users. > > It's normal to EXPUNGE the mailbox every time the user clicks "delete" > on an article? Nope. Mostly, "normal" would actually be the "move to trash" case. OTOH, the IMAP design, *and* implementations, assume that EXPUNGE can be expensive, and it is usually reserved for things like doing once, not on every single delete operation. > I think somebody protested when I had the inbox mail splitting thing do an > EXPUNGE on the inbox, or do I misremember? I don't think it is a good idea, but I could live with it. :) Daniel -- ✣ Daniel Pittman ✉ daniel@rimspace.net ☎ +61 401 155 707 ♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons