[Imap-protocol] Childless noselect mailboxes
mrc+uw at panda.com
Tue Dec 29 09:54:46 PST 2009
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Does anyone think these are actually useful? If server allows creating
> "foo/bar" without foo existing, is it actually useful to allow "CREATE
> foo/" and have it create a \Noselect "foo" without any children?
Are you saying that the only way to do an mkdir MUST be by implicit
creation, and that if the last child is deleted the superior MUST be
Note those words "MUST". They are significant to the argument.
It is perfectly compliant for a server to treat "CREATE foo/" as meaning
"create a mailbox named foo, and ignore that trailing /". It is also
perfectly compliant for a superior to vanish if it is \NoSelect and its
last child is deleted.
In fact, that is how my new server works.
But that is different from requiring those behaviors.
-- Mark --
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
More information about the Imap-protocol