Michael M Slusarz wrote: > Quoting Per Jessen <p...@computer.org>: > >> I'm trying to get my head around this - the special_use flag is given >> out to an IMAP client as a _hint_ of where certain messages belong? > > Yes. There's no guarantee that any of the messages currently in that > mailbox adhere to that attribute though, so you can't make assumptions > about any individual message. But from a configuration perspective, > it can be useful to at least provide a better default value(s) than a > MUA-specific hard-coded value.
Right, thanks. >> If that's correct, what would be the purpose of having two (or more) >> such hints for e.g. \Sent ? > > We allow different "identities" to be configured in our client -- e.g. > I send out messages under a number of different > e-mail/header/signatures. It is *very* handy to have the sent-mail > messages saved to a different mailbox for each identity. The RFC > defines the \Sent flag to include any mailbox "used to hold copies of > messages that have been sent." By this definition, each mailbox > should be flagged with \Sent. > > Or you have an existing account that contains pre-existing "Sent", > "Sent Mail", and "sentmail" mailboxes. All of those are valid sent > mailboxes under the \Sent definition. Yes, that would be an example - I have at least 6 different names for "Sent", some accounts use three or even four. I gather support of these hints is still quite limited, but I'm still struggling with understanding what good multiple hints of e.g. "Sent" is to a client? Is the hint also used to identify places to look for sent mail? Interesting stuff - now what about the actual problem of mapping multiple such mailboxes into one? My immediate thought was "symlinks" - would that work? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (12.9°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland.
