Quoting Greg Sullivan <greg.sulli...@sullivang.net>:
I was gobsmacked when I discovered that duplicates could easily occur!
Quote from the IMAP wikipedia page:
Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) is a protocol for e-mail retrieval
and storage developed by Mark Crispin in 1986 at Stanford University as an
alternative to POP. IMAP unlike POP, specifically allows multiple clients
simultaneously connected to the same mailbox, and through flags stored on
the server, different clients accessing the same mailbox at the same or
different times can detect state changes made by other clients.
Disagree. I'm not "gobsmacked" due to the fact that IMAP was designed
to ensure that no unintentional DESTRUCTIVE actions take place. I'd
be "gobsmacked" if it was the opposite - preferring duplicate
prevention over message loss.
What's worse:
1. Concurrent users where one accidentally deletes (i.e. EXPUNGE) a
message due to inconsistent mailbox state between the two sessions.
2. Concurrent users where one accidentally creates a duplicate message
during a move operation by the other user.
1 is worse. (Although 1 becomes mostly irrelevant once UIDs are used
and UIDPLUS is available.) But 2, in real-world practice, simply
doesn't happen enough to make it a critical issue.
michael
