Re: [Evolution] Demand Filter/Deletion Bug

[Jeffrey Stedfast <fejj helixcode com>]

Alrighty, I'll take a look into doing that then.

Jeff

On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Dan Winship wrote:
> Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 11:21:03 -0400
> To: fejj helixcode com
> From: Dan Winship <danw helixcode com>
> CC: evolution helixcode com
> Subject: Re: [Evolution] Demand Filter/Deletion Bug
>
> > I just added this to bugzilla and thought about it. This originally
> > sounded like an excellent idea but I don't think it'd work because
> > IMAP's EXPUNGE command will not let you specify specific UIDs to
> > expunge...it works the same way Camel's expunge currently works -
> > kill everything that was marked as deleted. This means that in order
> > to do this we'd have to come up with an ugly hack that first
> > unmarked the messages that were marked for deletion but not
> > specified in the uids argument passed to the expunge
> > function...expunge...then go back and remark them as deleted.
>
> It's not *that* ugly. :-)
>
> Also, if the server supports UIDPLUS, you can use "UID EXPUNGE".
>
> -- Dan
-- 
Spruce: anything else would be uncivilized