On Jul 18, 2008, at 6:33 PM, Karl Rudnick wrote:
How could any implementation of this protocol possibly use a file systemtime stamp to represent that important piece of meta-data,no matter where the file lives? It seems totally reasonable that this is what Outlook uses for the Received date (and I rarely defend Microsoft).This seems like a real design flaw in the dovecot implementation. I am fairlynew to dovecot (and like many aspects of it over uw-imap), but havingto really be careful with my mail store's mtimes borders on the absurd. I realize it is "implementation defined", but the intent of the definitionsurely does not refer to file system time stamps. Any chance this canbe reconsidered? Is this an actual dovecot issue or a more general Maildir issue?
Why does it matter where the timestamp lives? No matter how it was stored, you would have had the exact same problem because your client told Dovecot to use the current timestamp when saving the messages.
And why would keeping the INTERNALDATE in mtime be bad? It only changes if you write to the file. And existing mails must not be modified or you'll get other problems as well.
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
