Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-30 Thread Charles Marcus
On 2010-12-30 6:19 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 16:32 +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: >> Also, if we change the separator, do we have to change it on the subscription >> file ? Could it be the source of my problem ? > No. TB just seems to break down if separator is changed. Recreat

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-30 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 16:32 +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > Also, if we change the separator, do we have to change it on the subscription > file ? Could it be the source of my problem ? No. TB just seems to break down if separator is changed. Recreating the account should be an easy solution. si

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-23 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 02:19:22PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > 20101223-135556-38406.in:5 select "AA/BB/CC/foobar" I forgot to mention that some of those mailboxes were not touched at all by the user during the period where dovecot was using "/". And now that dovecot is back to what it was (1.2

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-23 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 02:19:22PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: Also, if we change the separator, do we have to change it on the subscription file ? Could it be the source of my problem ? -- Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur | Pôle informatique - systèmes et réseau

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-23 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 10:03:00PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: So basically, I went from 1.2 with #separator = -> can you confirm the the client should use "." then ? to 2.8.0 with namespace { type = private separator = "/" and now back to 2.8.0 with namespace {

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 09:52:51PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > in 1.2.12, I left the separator= commented out, so I had the default. > in 2.0.8 I set separator = / myself. > > Still I can't see why it would lead TB to use a dot in a previously existing > mailbox name. Could it be that because

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 10:44:28PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote: > No, default is '.' with maildir. Oh my god, you're right : in 1.2.12, I left the separator= commented out, so I had the default. in 2.0.8 I set separator = / myself. Still I can't see why it would lead TB to use a dot in a previo

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Timo Sirainen
On 22.12.2010, at 22.31, Thomas Hummel wrote: > And you have namespace separator set to '/'? > > Yes (which is the default, isn't it ?) No, default is '.' with maildir. >> In such setup having '.' just isn't valid. All '.' characters in the >> directory name get converted to '/'. > > I know,

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 07:12:29PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote: Thanks and sorry for the fuzzy description but it's all I've got for now ;-( > So you have Maildir++ layout and you don't have listescape plugin? Yes. And you have namespace separator set to '/'? Yes (which is the default, isn't i

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Timo Sirainen
On 22.12.2010, at 18.38, Thomas Hummel wrote: > A user couldn't move a message from .Sent/ to .GVV-tangy.GVV/ > Thunderbird said : > > Character not allowed in mailbox name: '.'. So you have Maildir++ layout and you don't have listescape plugin? And you have namespace separator set to '/'? In

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 05:38:06PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 05:28:07PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > > > hmmm, not so sure as some other user states the message (which I still > > haven't > > seen myself) talks about "." as the invalid character. > > And finally one

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 05:28:07PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > hmmm, not so sure as some other user states the message (which I still haven't > seen myself) talks about "." as the invalid character. And finally one case correctly described : A user couldn't move a message from .Sent/ to .GVV-t

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > However, some info seems to confirm that it involves moving a message from a > mailbox to another where one of the mailbox has got non-ASCII character. A > restart of TB seems to fix the problem indeed. hmmm, not so sure as some oth

Re: [Dovecot] Reverting from 2.0. to 1.2

2010-12-22 Thread Thomas Hummel
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 04:13:20PM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > This is user input so I don't have any details nor sufficient element to > consider it a real problem. A Thunderbird restart seems to solve the problem. However, some info seems to confirm that it involves moving a message from a ma