On Wednesday, 24 November 1999 at 11:43, John P . Looney wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 08:04:57PM -0500, Brendan Cully mentioned:
> > In short, does mutt put all folders that have unread mail in the "new
> > mail" list, or only those that have mail that has arrived since you last
> > opened the folder?
>
> It seems that neither is 100% satisfactory. The way that it is in 1.1.1,
> is that when mutt scans the folders for new mail, it'll mark the folders as
> RECENT. If you don't read the folders, and twenty seconds later mutt polls the
> folders - they are now marked as UNSEEN - even though you have not opened
> the folder etc.
>
> A folder should be considered "New" if the user hasn't looked at the index
> of that folder since new mail has arrived. So, strictly speaking that
> change I mentioned isn't quite right either (It'll mark the folder as new,
> as long as there is a single unread mail in it).
>
> The folder should be set to "New" if the server considers it to contain
> RECENT messages, but this "New" flag should not be cleared until you
> actually view the folder through the "index" screen - it should not be
> cleared as soon as the folder status changes to UNSEEN.
That makes perfect sense. In fact, that is what is does happen on most
IMAP servers (eg I use UW-IMAP - that's why I never had a problem with
the behaviour of "New" myself). Can you tell me which one you're
using? It doesn't behave the same as most others - it seems to expect
the mail client to cache \Recent information once it's been
given. Doing that would be a big change.
Sorry for the lag - I get busy sometimes.
-Brendan
PS you can find out which IMAP server you're using by just telnetting
to port 143 of your mailhost. The first line of greeting should give
you the version string.
--
Brendan Cully <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | OLD SKOOL ROOLZ
"I'll level with you: | .-_|\
Please let me on your show, I'd | / \
Like a day off school" | Perth ->*.--._/
