This commit removes hardcoded 500 ms debounce
from storage that delays all storage notification subscribers
such as IDLE and NOTIFY commands.
500 ms debounce constant NOTIFY_DELAY_MSECS
was added in 2009 [1]. Before that Dovecot
was only delivering notifications
when a second-resolution timer
is c
On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 11:37:10AM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 15. Dec 2023, at 1.59, Alex wrote:
> >
> >>> I would actually like to disable this delay completely on our server
> >>> setup [6],
> >>> as for chat it is common to receive multiple
> >>> messages in a short period of time,
> >>
On 15. Dec 2023, at 1.59, Alex wrote:
>
>>> I would actually like to disable this delay completely on our server setup
>>> [6],
>>> as for chat it is common to receive multiple
>>> messages in a short period of time,
>>> e.g. when sending a message to a group and receiving multiple read receipts
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 07:17:16PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > I wonder if this debounce delay was added as a workaround
> > for an internal Dovecot bug or a client bug
> > and is not necessary anymore.
> > It does not seem to be useful for well-behaving clients because
> > if necessary the cli
On 14. Dec 2023, at 16.21, Alex wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have been investigating the reason for high
> end-to-end email delivery delay
> (>1 second to send a message to echo bot and receive a reply back)
> on a Postfix+Dovecot email server setup
> used to run the tests for Delta Chat core [1]
Hello all,
I have been investigating the reason for high
end-to-end email delivery delay
(>1 second to send a message to echo bot and receive a reply back)
on a Postfix+Dovecot email server setup
used to run the tests for Delta Chat core [1].
It appeared that most of the time was spent
between the
> On 27 Jul 2019, at 13.15, Jorge Bastos via dovecot
> wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> I just discovered the reason!
>
> When i migrated the account from the old imap server to the new (dovecot), i
> didn't removed and created the account in msoutlook, as i didn't saw any
> reason to do it.
> Creating
On 27 Jul 2019, at 04:15, Jorge Bastos wrote:
> When i migrated the account from the old imap server to the new (dovecot), i
> didn't removed and created the account in msoutlook, as i didn't saw any
> reason to do it.
> Creating the account again, IDLE works ok!
Glad you got that figured out. Se
and thank you for the help,
-Original Message-
From: dovecot On Behalf Of Jorge Bastos via
dovecot
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2019 23:32
To: 'Dovecot Mailing List'
Subject: RE: Help with IMAP IDLE
Well,
I've been doing some research, and it seems that msoutlook 2016 and 201
Well,
I've been doing some research, and it seems that msoutlook 2016 and 2019
doesn't quite have imap idle support.
The odd part, is that when i had DBMail, it was IDLE'ing (i swear),
Would dbmail send something different that make it work? It was an old
version of dbmail, 2.3.7
Yes,
Escape character is '^]'.
* OK [CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 SASL-IR LOGIN-REFERRALS ID ENABLE IDLE LITERAL+
AUTH=PLAIN AUTH=LOGIN]
> Yes, it works with other IMAP servers, why should not work with dovecot?
> It was working with DBMail, and it's working with an account from my Telco
> that used ci
On 22 Jul 2019, at 03:45, Jorge Bastos via dovecot wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2019, at 11:50, Jorge Bastos via dovecot
> wrote:
>>> SSL/TLS is done via Stunnel
>
>> Dirst, others have asked but I haven’t seen an answer, do you have any
>> reason to think Outlook suppor
> On 22 Jul 2019, at 12.45, Jorge Bastos via dovecot
> wrote:
>
> On Jul 21, 2019, at 11:50, Jorge Bastos via dovecot
> wrote:
>> SSL/TLS is done via Stunnel
>
>> Dirst, others have asked but I haven’t seen an answer, do you have any
>> reason to thi
On Jul 21, 2019, at 11:50, Jorge Bastos via dovecot wrote:
> SSL/TLS is done via Stunnel
> Dirst, others have asked but I haven’t seen an answer, do you have any reason
> to think Outlook supports IMAP idle at all? I mean, I know outlook.com >
> doesn’t support it, so maybe
On Jul 21, 2019, at 11:50, Jorge Bastos via dovecot wrote:
> SSL/TLS is done via Stunnel
Dirst, others have asked but I haven’t seen an answer, do you have any reason
to think Outlook supports IMAP idle at all? I mean, I know outlook.com doesn’t
support it, so maybe it just doesn’t w
r this.
SSL/TLS is done via Stunnel
>
> https://doc.dovecot.org/admin_manual/debugging/debugging_rawlog/
>
> In fact, you could use this feature to find out whether outlook even tries to
> use IMAP IDLE in the first place.
Let me check, it must be a reason to not be working with dovecot, when it was
with DBMail,
Will check and reply soon,
>
> Aki
logs feature, which is better for this.
https://doc.dovecot.org/admin_manual/debugging/debugging_rawlog/
In fact, you could use this feature to find out whether outlook even tries to
use IMAP IDLE in the first place.
Aki
iling List'
Subject: RE: Help with IMAP IDLE
Sorry...
I meant to past dovecot and not postfix, doing simultaneously stuff ends up
in this!
Yes, i migrated from DBMail and it was working OK.
Here it is:
root@fastmail:/etc/dovecot# doveconf -n|grep -i idle
imap_idle_notify_interva
/dovecot#
-Original Message-
From: dovecot On Behalf Of Alexander Dalloz
via dovecot
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2019 13:31
To: dovecot@dovecot.org
Subject: Re: Help with IMAP IDLE
Am 21.07.19 um 14:24 schrieb Jorge Bastos via dovecot:
> Hi,
[ ... ]
> How can i make IDLE work for rea
Here's the full dovecot -n for you both:
https://pastebin.com/C5JEJr0D
From: Aki Tuomi
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2019 13:29
To: Jorge Bastos ; Jorge Bastos via dovecot
Subject: Re: Help with IMAP IDLE
On 21/07/2019 15:24 Jorge Bastos via dovecot mailto:dovecot@doveco
IMAP
is been poorly implemented, across many generations of Outlook. So are
you sure your Outlook even supports IMAP IDLE? And if it does, not only
on the single folder you have a running connection to but for all folders?
Here's my conf, should it be reflected in postconf -n (is it t
On 21/07/2019 15:24 Jorge Bastos via dovecot wrote:
Hi,
I’m becaming crazy about this!
I’ve asked before, not no matter what i do or conf, never works.
How can i make IDLE work for real with MSOutlook, so that i
Hi,
I'm becaming crazy about this!
I've asked before, not no matter what i do or conf, never works.
How can i make IDLE work for real with MSOutlook, so that i can receive
emails when they arrive, instead of changing folder/get out and in my
account?
Here's my conf, should it be reflected
map.conf:54:
imap_client_workarounds=outlook-idle is no longer necessary
-Original Message-
From: dovecot On Behalf Of Jorge Bastos via
dovecot
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 11:32
To: dovecot@dovecot.org
Subject: RE: IMAP IDLE
Hum guys,
For this, i was comparing configuration from my ol
-Original Message-
From: dovecot On Behalf Of Jorge Bastos via
dovecot
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 11:04
To: dovecot@dovecot.org
Subject: RE: IMAP IDLE
Hi,
2.2.33.2
Well your confs are almost mine except for
director_ping_idle_timeout = 30 secs
submission_relay_max_idle_time = 29 mi
ppear in the
inbox, no matter if it was selected for 15m or the last 4 hours
Any ideia please let me know,
-Original Message-
From: dovecot On Behalf Of @lbutlr via dovecot
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 0:20
To: dovecot@dovecot.org
Subject: Re: IMAP IDLE
On 19 Jun 2019, at 16:11, Jorge B
On 19 Jun 2019, at 16:11, Jorge Bastos via dovecot wrote:
> root@fastmail:/etc/dovecot# doveconf |grep -i idle
> default_idle_kill = 1 mins
> imap_idle_notify_interval = 2 mins
> imapc_max_idle_time = 29 mins
> mailbox_idle_check_interval = 30 secs
I have:
default_idle_kill = 1 mins
director_pin
Hi,
With outlook 2016+ i've seen that IDLE may be missing some configuration.
Almost all time, when i'm in the inbox, i don't get new emails if no
activity for 1 or 2 minutes (i think), i have to get out of the account and
select the inbox or click other folder in the account and go to inbox a
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 12:49:02PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2016, at 15:08, cleber-lis...@inetweb.com.br wrote:
> >
> > Hello Guys,
> > I guess that I found a bug in Dovecot 2.2.18 and 2.2.25 versions. The
> > problem it's when I try to connect in a Dovecot used a proxy to another
Mailing List ; Cleber @ Listas
Assunto: Re: RES: Possible IMAP IDLE bug in Dovecot 2.2.18 and 2.2.25
You should probably update your proxy to provide the same capability list to
your clients as your SmarterMail backend (with few extra things).
That is imap_capability = IMAP4rev1 STARTTLS UIDPLUS
186][57965505] response: wclw OK NOOP completed
> 10:39:36 [201.74.248.186][13534103] disconnected at 24/08/2016 10:39:36
>
>
>
>
>
> -Mensagem original-
> De: dovecot [mailto:dovecot-boun...@dovecot.org] Em nome de Timo Sirainen
> Enviada em: quarta-feira, 24 de
86][57965505] response: wclw OK NOOP completed
10:39:36 [201.74.248.186][13534103] disconnected at 24/08/2016 10:39:36
-Mensagem original-
De: dovecot [mailto:dovecot-boun...@dovecot.org] Em nome de Timo Sirainen
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 24 de agosto de 2016 06:49
Para: cleber-lis...@inetweb.com.br
case, would not the because Dovecot send the IDLE command to
SmarterMail.
-Mensagem original-
De: dovecot [mailto:dovecot-boun...@dovecot.org] Em nome de Aki Tuomi
Enviada em: terça-feira, 23 de agosto de 2016 13:25
Para: dovecot@dovecot.org
Assunto: Re: Possible IMAP IDLE bug in Dovecot 2
On 23 Aug 2016, at 15:08, cleber-lis...@inetweb.com.br wrote:
>
> Hello Guys,
> I guess that I found a bug in Dovecot 2.2.18 and 2.2.25 versions. The
> problem it's when I try to connect in a Dovecot used a proxy to another
> e-mail server (in our case it's a Smartermail Server) the DoveCot send
Hello Guys,
I guess that I found a bug in Dovecot 2.2.18 and 2.2.25 versions. The
problem it's when I try to connect in a Dovecot used a proxy to another
e-mail server (in our case it's a Smartermail Server) the DoveCot send a
lot of IDLE commands to the destination server. With that, the LO
On 23.08.2016 19:15, Aki Tuomi wrote:
On 23.08.2016 15:08, cleber-lis...@inetweb.com.br wrote:
Hello Guys,
I guess that I found a bug in Dovecot 2.2.18 and 2.2.25 versions. The
problem it's when I try to connect in a Dovecot used a proxy to another
e-mail server (in our case it's a Smarter
On 23.08.2016 15:08, cleber-lis...@inetweb.com.br wrote:
Hello Guys,
I guess that I found a bug in Dovecot 2.2.18 and 2.2.25 versions. The
problem it's when I try to connect in a Dovecot used a proxy to another
e-mail server (in our case it's a Smartermail Server) the DoveCot send a
lot of ID
Hello Guys,
I guess that I found a bug in Dovecot 2.2.18 and 2.2.25 versions. The
problem it's when I try to connect in a Dovecot used a proxy to another
e-mail server (in our case it's a Smartermail Server) the DoveCot send a
lot of IDLE commands to the destination server. With that, the LOG f
The IDLE disconnection timeout is hardwired in the Dovecot code
http://wiki.dovecot.org/Timeouts
It's set to the RFC minimum of 30min.
I am ok if connection is closed automatically after 30 min if client is not
responding but connection is not being closed even after 2 days.
Hmm.
I am ok if connection is closed automatically after 30 min if client is not
responding but connection is not being closed even after 2 days.
On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 2:52 AM, Joseph Tam wrote:
> Joy wrote:
>
> We have implement imap idle in web mail built by us to have
>
Joy wrote:
We have implement imap idle in web mail built by us to have
push mail feature. IMAP idle working perfectly with browser notification
and we are happy with it but having one issue with users who close the
browser directly and never logout in that case there are number of
Hi guys,
We have implement imap idle in web mail built by us to have
push mail feature. IMAP idle working perfectly with browser notification
and we are happy with it but having one issue with users who close the
browser directly and never logout in that case there are number of idle
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013, FF wrote:
Thanks, that's interesting -- two questions:
1) Why is it not possible? Just not implemented, or is there any technical
reason that actually prevents it from being implemented?
Because the current implementation of
Hi,
Thanks, that's interesting -- two questions:
1) Why is it not possible? Just not implemented, or is there any
technical reason that actually prevents it from being implemented?
2) What do you mean by INBOX? Another, completely separate email
account? Yes, that would be my backup plan.
Tha
Am 23.07.2013 09:39, schrieb Steffen Kaiser:
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, FF wrote:
>
>> I've been using Dovecot with Sieve for a long time already, and I'm
>> very happy with it. Push is working fine too. I was wondering,
>> however, whether it would be possible to define a Sieve rule (perhaps
>> using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, FF wrote:
I've been using Dovecot with Sieve for a long time already, and I'm very
happy with it. Push is working fine too. I was wondering, however, whether it
would be possible to define a Sieve rule (perhaps using some plug-
Hello,
I've been using Dovecot with Sieve for a long time already, and I'm very
happy with it. Push is working fine too. I was wondering, however,
whether it would be possible to define a Sieve rule (perhaps using some
plug-in), such that an IMAP push message gets sent out only for specific
s
On 23/08/2012 21:49, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 23.8.2012, at 23.26, Warren Baker wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 14.8.2012, at 11.18, Timo Sirainen wrote:
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12
On 24.8.2012, at 14.18, Matthew Powell wrote:
> On 2012-08-24, at 7.01, Jerry wrote:
>
>> I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
>> anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
>> require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem
Am 24.08.2012 13:18, schrieb Matthew Powell:
> On 2012-08-24, at 7.01, Jerry wrote:
>
>> I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
>> anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
>> require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem
On 2012-08-24, at 7.01, Jerry wrote:
> I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
> anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
> require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
> the prudent thing to do.
I wonder whether it
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:10:42 +0200
Warren Baker articulated:
> Yeah as others have mentioned - also not sure whether it is worth the
> effort to support IPv6's 'private' network (fc00::/7)?
> I havent seen anyone making use of this for their v6 enabled sites but
> others may have input here.
I wo
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>
>> Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?
>
> Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all
> corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there
> aren't more th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Timo Sirainen said the following on 23/08/12 22:49:
>> Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?
> Is it actually used? :)
YES!
I have a big customer (400 PCs) with 172.16.0.0/16 internal network and a
subnet of 192.168.0.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12-08-23 4:49 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 23.8.2012, at 23.26, Warren Baker wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>> On 14.8.2012, at 11.18, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>>
>>> v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovec
On 23.8.2012, at 23.26, Warren Baker wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>> On 14.8.2012, at 11.18, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>
>> v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c
>
> Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 14.8.2012, at 11.18, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?
--
.warren
On 14.8.2012, at 11.18, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>> As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from checking
>> multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this if you have
>> multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address and per IP ?
>
> Yes, doesn't
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is
> different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I
> think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point
> in cho
On 14.8.2012, at 11.04, Ed W wrote:
> - Then there is tcp keepalive. Does Dovecot enable these? (Sorry, I should
> look in the code...).
Yes.
> However, applications which enable it (eg optional in SSH) will trigger a
> default (I think) 75 second network packet
It's something like 2 hours
On 10/08/2012 10:25, Timo Sirainen wrote:
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?
If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
I
10.08.2012 16:57, Reindl Harald пишет:
surely IT IS an argument
on a non-iPhone you can chosse what is important
your agrumentation is even one argument more against iPhone
If we now talking about android vs iPhone now... Imagine Android default
email client. It have no many features, that iPho
Am 10.08.2012 11:21, schrieb Sergey S. Kovalev:
>> and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
>> are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
>> completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"
> This is not an argument. You can have hundred of folders sorte
10.08.2012 16:25, Timo Sirainen пишет:
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?
If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imag
Hi,
On 10-Aug-12 4:48, Timo Sirainen wrote:
Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE
feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation
between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..
the Apple push serv
On 10.8.2012, at 12.21, Sergey S. Kovalev wrote:
>>> I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
>>> in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection
>> so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"
> As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder.
Assuming NOTIFY
10.08.2012 15:59, Reindl Harald пишет:
Am 10.08.2012 10:46, schrieb Sergey S. Kovalev:
10.08.2012 15:16, Reindl Harald пишет:
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push
Sure,
Am 10.08.2012 10:46, schrieb Sergey S. Kovalev:
> 10.08.2012 15:16, Reindl Harald пишет:
>> i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
>> by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
>> should be used for push
>>
> Sure, it can do it in two ways: op
10.08.2012 15:16, Reindl Harald пишет:
Am 10.08.2012 09:08, schrieb Sergey S. Kovalev:
iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP
limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold
Am 10.08.2012 09:08, schrieb Sergey S. Kovalev:
> iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP
> limitation.
> IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
> If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold look
> for Ac
On 10.8.2012, at 9.31, Robin wrote:
> On 8/9/2012 11:26 PM, Luigi Rosa wrote:
>> I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
>> it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.
>
> It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.
Dovec
Am 10.08.2012 09:08, schrieb Sergey S. Kovalev:
> On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use
> IMAP server as backend.
z-push works nice here with android, also the new horde beta has now
calender, abook, notes, mail sync
--
Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
10.08.2012 09:44, dove...@noboost.org пишет:
Hi All,
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.
Has anyone successfully dep
Am 10.08.2012 08:26, schrieb Luigi Rosa:
> dove...@noboost.org said the following on 10/08/2012 04:44:
>
>> Probably a very common question now days.
>> I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
>> server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1
On 8/9/2012 11:26 PM, Luigi Rosa wrote:
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.
It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.
=R=
dove...@noboost.org said the following on 10/08/2012 04:44:
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.
I used K-9 clie
Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE
feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation
between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..
Hi All,
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.
Has anyone successfully deployed this? If yes, did you have to use an
app
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 4.7.2011, at 13.07, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
>
>> Two telnet imap connections open and both idling on the inbox and only
>> one of them gets the "1 recent" notification.
>
> This is how it's supposed to work according to IMAP RFC. Onl
On 4.7.2011, at 13.07, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
> Two telnet imap connections open and both idling on the inbox and only
> one of them gets the "1 recent" notification.
This is how it's supposed to work according to IMAP RFC. Only one session ever
sees a message as \Recent. Both of them gets an
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Ed W wrote:
> On 04/07/2011 09:04, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> in my testing dovecot (1.2 in that case) seems to not notify all
>> idling clients about new "recent" mails but only one of them. The
>> others get usually a message about the new number
On 04/07/2011 09:04, Wolfgang Rosenauer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in my testing dovecot (1.2 in that case) seems to not notify all
> idling clients about new "recent" mails but only one of them. The
> others get usually a message about the new number of mails after some
> time but never recent ones.
> Only
Hi,
in my testing dovecot (1.2 in that case) seems to not notify all
idling clients about new "recent" mails but only one of them. The
others get usually a message about the new number of mails after some
time but never recent ones.
Only one client gets notified about a new mail. Is that a known i
> Well, fine.. http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.2/rev/367ce71922bf
Woohoo, thanks :-)
> But I don't know when 1.2.14 release will come, if ever.
We'll see. For now I'm just running a patched version, but this saves me
the trouble of recompiling if 1.2.14 every gets released :-)
Gr.
Matthijs
sig
On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 16:21 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > I was planning to avoid adding any changes to v1.2 that aren't bugfixes.
> > (This more like a feature. :)
>
> Oh, come on. You even wrote "/* FIXME: maybe some day */"
> :)
Well, fine.. http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.2/rev/367ce7192
* Timo Sirainen :
> On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 12:22 +0200, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
> > Hi Timo,
> >
> > > Here: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.0/rev/eb1f471a924d
> >
> > Cool! I've just tested this patch on 1.2 (current hg version), and the
> > patch applies cleanly and seems to work as well. I'm r
On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 12:22 +0200, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
> Hi Timo,
>
> > Here: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.0/rev/eb1f471a924d
>
> Cool! I've just tested this patch on 1.2 (current hg version), and the
> patch applies cleanly and seems to work as well. I'm running it right
> now.
>
> Are
Hi Timo,
> Here: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.0/rev/eb1f471a924d
Cool! I've just tested this patch on 1.2 (current hg version), and the
patch applies cleanly and seems to work as well. I'm running it right
now.
Are there any plans to include this in 1.2 still?
Gr.
Matthijs
signature.asc
D
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Timo,
On 2010-08-04 23:54, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Here: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.0/rev/eb1f471a924d
Thanks, that's great! Now dovecot enables people who sort server-side
and want IDLE notifications for all those mailboxes, but do not want t
Here: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.0/rev/eb1f471a924d
though there's a bug
> > > where messages don't get removed from mailbox always:
> >
> > Oh, I see. I'll give it another try then, I believe I tried this, but
> > never got notified of new mails in the virtual mailbox through the IMAP
> > IDLE
Hi Timo, Patrick,
> > Virtual plugin does already work like that. Although there's a bug
> > where messages don't get removed from mailbox always:
>
> Oh, I see. I'll give it another try then, I believe I tried this, but
> never got notified of new mails in
On 15.04.2010 7:03, Daniel I. Applebaum wrote:
Patrick Nagel wrote:
One of the core
developers of K-9 Mail says:
"I've been interested in implementing IMAP NOTIFY in K-9 Mail, but will
only do it once dovecot supports it."
Yeah, that was me. :-) I use dovecot as the reference server for all
my
Patrick Nagel wrote:
One of the core
developers of K-9 Mail says:
"I've been interested in implementing IMAP NOTIFY in K-9 Mail, but will
only do it once dovecot supports it."
Yeah, that was me. :-) I use dovecot as the reference server for all
my work on K-9 Mail, and can't think of how to
where messages don't get removed from mailbox always:
>
> - virtual: removed messages don't get expunged unless EXPUNGE is
> issued in same session. otherwise they get forgotten and never
> removed.
Oh, I see. I'll give it another try then, I believe I tried this, but
never got
On 9.4.2010, at 9.31, Patrick Nagel wrote:
> 2) Enhancing dovecot's Virtual plugin, so virtual mailboxes do not only
> get updated on select and expunge, but also when anything changes that
> affects the set of messages shown in the virtual mailbox. I guess that
> would have an impact on performan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Nikolay,
(I changed my dovecot mailing list subscription from my work mail
account to my private mail account - I'm the guy who started this thread)
On 2010-04-10 15:22, Nikolay Shopik wrote:
> On 10.04.2010 11:13, Patrick Nagel wrote:
>> "The cli
On 12/04/2010 02:49, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anybody know whether iPhone is supposed to be able to do IMAP IDLE? I
> know it does "Push" but that seems to be using Apple's Mobile Me and Exchange.
>
Hi,
The iPhone doesn't seem to
Hi all,
Does anybody know whether iPhone is supposed to be able to do IMAP IDLE? I
know it does "Push" but that seems to be using Apple's Mobile Me and Exchange.
Cheers,
Sabahattin
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
On 10.04.2010 11:13, Patrick Nagel wrote:
"The client can also request notifications on other mailboxes by name
or by a limited mailbox pattern match. Message-related notifications
returned for the currently selected mailbox will be those specified
by the SELECTED/SELECTED-DELAYED mailbox
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
