[Imap-protocol] MOVE is a pipeline

[Timo Sirainen]

On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 09:26 -0700, Dan Karp wrote:

> > > Would it be unreasonable to state that the only untagged EXPUNGE

> > > responses from a MOVE command may be those directly resulting from

> > > the MOVE? (UID MOVE, like UID FETCH, would have no such

> > > constraints.)

> > 

> > That requires an amendment to RFC 3501 7.4.1.

> 

> Good form would be to amend it in any case.  MOVE would definitely

> fall into the category of commands for which EXPUNGEs from other

> sources would cause loss of synchronization, and thus it needs to

> be added to the list in 7.4.1.


The problem isn't only EXPUNGEs, but all untagged replies that refer to
messages (assuming MOVE doesn't send EXPUNGEs/MOVED replies to note when
the sequences change).

Oh, now I started also thinking about NOTIFY+QRESYNC combination where
you can tell it to send VANISHED replies at any time. If MOVE is sending
EXPUNGE/VANISHED replies and if client cares about which ones of those
were from MOVE, it couldn't really know since a VANISHED reply might
have been sent to client just before the server received MOVE command.