[POLL] Development guidance

[Ken Murchison]

Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 04:58:59PM +0000, David Carter wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, Ken Murchison wrote:
>>
>>> I'm getting ready to implement the QRESYNC extension for the upcoming
>>> LEMONADE interop.
>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-lemonade-reconnect-client-06.txt
>> Reading the Internet Draft, I'm a little puzzled by:
>>
>>    4.3.  Additional state required on the server
>>
>>    [...]
>>
>>    Also note that if the UIDVALIDITY of the mailbox changes [...], then
>>    any state associated with expunged messages MUST be deleted as well.
>>
>> I'm not clear what the motivation is here given that a new UIDvalidity 
>> forces a full resync from any client: no QRESYNC is possible.
>>
>> This requirement is likely to be a pain for:
>>
>>> 1. Leverage delayed expunge which already stores state for expunged 
>>> messages in cyrus.expunge (up until the records are purged by cyr_expire).
>> Given that unexpunge assigns a new UIDvalidity to the mailbox.
> 
> I think that unexpunge should actually be the same as "COPY" where the
> source is the "deleted" record.  This updating UIDvalidity is just rude,
> especially if you're only unexpunging a couple of messages from a much
> bigger mailbox.
> 
> SEEN state handling is a pain, but that's always been a pain.  I don't
> mind too much if an unexpunged message shows up as "unseen" in its
> new incarnation.

I think I agree.  We have to change the UID of the unexpunged message to 
UIDNEXT, and rename() the message file accordingly.

-- 
Kenneth Murchison
Systems Programmer
Project Cyrus Developer/Maintainer
Carnegie Mellon University