From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/30154 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Amos Gouaux Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: nnimap better than advertised Date: 22 Apr 2000 00:55:29 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87ya6kxq0a.fsf@cenderis.demon.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035166723 6971 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 02:18:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 02:18:43 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from lisa.math.uh.edu (lisa.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.49]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720BBD051E for ; Sat, 22 Apr 2000 01:56:06 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by lisa.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAB31405; Sat, 22 Apr 2000 00:56:04 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sat, 22 Apr 2000 00:55:08 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from mailhost.sclp.com (postfix@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA12249 for ; Sat, 22 Apr 2000 00:54:55 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from ns0.utdallas.edu (ns0.utdallas.edu [129.110.10.1]) by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55EDFD051E for ; Sat, 22 Apr 2000 01:55:10 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from spartacus.utdallas.edu (spartacus.utdallas.edu [129.110.3.11]) by ns0.utdallas.edu (Postfix) with SMTP id 2747D1A000B for ; Sat, 22 Apr 2000 00:53:59 -0500 (CDT) Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Bruce Stephens's message of "11 Apr 2000 22:54:29 +0100" Original-Lines: 20 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0804 (Gnus v5.8.4) XEmacs/21.1 (Bryce Canyon) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:30154 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:30154 >>>>> On 11 Apr 2000 22:54:29 +0100, >>>>> Bruce Stephens (bs) writes: bs> Is my understanding correct? If so, then this looks like it's exactly bs> what I'd expect based on my experiences of nnml (say), so why is the bs> manual warning me to expect something unexpected? I think this comes from past discussions (mainly on the nnimap list) about the delete model typical with many IMAP clients. That is, traditionally one would flag messages to be deleted, then perform an expunge to physically blow them away. Until the expunge was performed, one could revisit that folder at any time and still see those messages flagged to be deleted. Since gnus doesn't display messages flagged to be deleted, this doesn't translate literally. Instead, I think most folks use expiration to achieve similar (though more powerful) results. Amos