On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 17:35 +0200, Thomas Hummel wrote: > Can this new mail be named identically, i.e. > 1215166123.52887_0.host.dom.ain:2, ? > if so, it would be a problem when merging.
Yes, except for Dovecot's potential warning: > > Dovecot doesn't really like if messages get "unexpunged" > > Why would messages be considered unexpunged (that would concern only messages > which were previously tagged as "Deleted", right ?) ? Or do you mean that the > index/cache mechanism would notice that messages have disappeared ? dovecot-uidlist is recreated lazily. So it may list files that have already been deleted. So when Dovecot notices that there exists a new file that's already listed in dovecot-uidlist but that has been expunged from Dovecot's index files, it'll figure out the message is unexpunged and to avoid breaking IMAP clients it'll log a warning and give a new UID to the file. > > dovecot-keywords could be a problem if the restored mail used keywords, > > although it currently isn't a problem since keywords never get removed > > so the existing dovecot-keywords file produces correct results. That > > might change some day though. > > You mean that the following sequence cannot happen since keywords in > dovecot-keywords never get deleted : > > . message M filename contain keywork b > . message M gets deleted accidentaly > . keyword b gets deleted from dovecot-keywords > . message M is restored but the b keyword isn't known anymore > > ? Right. Keywords can only be added currently. > So, apart from this keyword and unexpunged issues (the first one > currently working and the second one having the "add a letter" > workaround"), nothing prevents to merge (by simply copying messages in > cur/) restored and new messages for the user (in the case it wouldn't > be an option to let the user do the dirty job ;-)) ? Right.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
