[Gllug] Thunderbird, procmail and new mail

[Mike Brodbelt]

On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 14:34, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 03:23:59PM +0000, Mike wrote:
> > Trash folders are another pain. IMAP uses a delete/expunge model, but
> > all the GUI clients insist on a trash folder. Why Trash can't just be a
> > vFolder that displays all mail with \Deleted set, I don't know.
> 
> Because the IMAP standard makes absolutely no prescriptions about
> internal storage, which that would require it to do.  It would be hog
> slow, for one thing.  IMAP punishes the server enough as it is (by an
> amount directly proportional to the stupidity of your mail client).
> 
> > because they're all used to a Trash folder, and frankly I don't see why
> > it wouldn't be possible to make the Trash folder work better with IMAP.
> 
> That's a user-space issue and not seen as part of IMAP's remit.  A world
> of pain awaits if the protocol ever starts being bent to fit what are
> essentially cosmetic, client-side demands.

I think (amid my ranting) I've failed to make myself clear - I wasn't
arguing for server side/protocol changes, I just think the client should
be able to present a Trash folder interface to a user without needing to
actually create another folder on the server. Evolution already does it
- I can create vFolders that essentially encapsulate a query of a
mailbox. There are plenty of IMAP clients that display messages with
\Deleted set as struck out, or with a red "X", or whatever. Why cant
they just display them as stored in a virtual "Trash folder"? That way
the client could use the IMAP delete/expunge model as it was meant to be
used, while giving the user a nice cotton-wooly "Trash folder
experience"...

Mike.

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug