[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again
From: |
Robert Elz |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Oct 2017 05:49:21 +0700 |
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 14:57:03 -0700
From: Bakul Shah <address@hidden>
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
| Indeed. Keeping such mapping is what I planned to do. folder
| -pack only changes the local msgID<->UID map so no need to
| talk to the server for that
There is if you expect your concurrent accessing systems to work
correctly - once packed, all clients should see the same set of packed
message numbers, and they should refer to the same underlying messages.
kre
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Paul Vixie, 2017/10/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Ken Hornstein, 2017/10/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Paul Vixie, 2017/10/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Ken Hornstein, 2017/10/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Paul Vixie, 2017/10/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Ken Hornstein, 2017/10/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Ralph Corderoy, 2017/10/28
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Ken Hornstein, 2017/10/28
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Michael Richardson, 2017/10/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Bakul Shah, 2017/10/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again,
Robert Elz <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Bakul Shah, 2017/10/26
Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Ken Hornstein, 2017/10/26
Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP/nmh, again, Ralph Corderoy, 2017/10/26