[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: folder checking is not working.

At Wed, 14 Jul 2010 10:38:40 +0200,
David Maus wrote:
> 
> [1  <text/plain; US-ASCII (7bit)>]
> Per B. Sederberg wrote:
> >It's funny how you'll live with something until someone else reports
> >the same problem...  In any case, I've had the same issue for months
> >and I think I have everything configured correctly.  In fact it the
> >identical configuration worked I pointed to a MailDir, but now that
> >I'm using IMAP (to gmail, which may be the culprit) it does not work.
> 
> Hm.  It looks like Google's IMAP server is not entirely IMAP
> compliant.  Normally if a new message arrives in a IMAP mailbox it is
> flagged as \Recent.  If I send a mail to my Google mail account, the
> message arrives but is not marked as recent, but unseen:
> 
> ,----
> | [10:24:23] <- elmo-imap47 status Inbox (recent unseen messages)
> | [10:24:23] -> * STATUS "Inbox" (MESSAGES 282 RECENT 0 UNSEEN 1)
> | [10:24:23] -> elmo-imap47 OK Success
> | *elmo-imap47* OK arrived
> `----
> 
> wl-biff looks for \Recent messages and I think this is the right
> behavior because you might have unseen (unread) messages in the
> mailbox you already know they are there.
> 
> The only way to cope with this misbehavior would be to detect changes
> in the mailbox size using the total number of messages.  The Problem is
> that this is not reliable: If another client deletes 1 message and you
> get 1 new message, the total number of messages won't change.
> 

Hi David:

Thanks for looking into this in more detail.  I've sent a message to
the Gmail forums, but I doubt Google will be clambering to modify
their IMAP protocol just to make Wanderlust users happy :)

I guess other IMAP clients, such as Thunderbird, which I think does
get proper new mail notification, must keep a list of unread messages,
which they scan each time they check for new mail.

Alternatively, is it possible in IMAP to get a list of messages that
arrived after a certain time?  If so, then wl-biff could just keep
track of the last time it looked for new messages and query like
that.  

I'm sure whomever wrote wl-biff has thought about this way more than I
have, but there must be some way to work around it given that I've not
heard of this being an issue with other mail clients.

Thanks,
Per