Re: [Evolution] SOLVED (probably) Re: "Error while performing operation. Cannot get message with message ID ..."

[Volker Wysk <post volker-wysk de>]

Am Sonntag, den 04.08.2019, 00:05 +0100 schrieb Patrick O'Callaghan:
> On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 23:55 +0200, Volker Wysk wrote:
> > Am Samstag, den 03.08.2019, 22:45 +0100 schrieb Patrick
> > O'Callaghan:
> > > On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 23:21 +0200, Volker Wysk wrote:
> > > > > > So your suggestion is to change the IMAP protocol and have
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > IMAP
> > > > > > servers implement the change. Good luck with that.
> > > > >
> > > > > No. I'm just trying to make things clear.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd suggest, is that evolution should just ignore the
> > > > > server's
> > > > > response ("invalid id") in the context which we have here,
> > > > > since
> > > > > it
> > > > > can
> > > > > be perfectly okay, and not be a server-side error.
> > > >
> > > > I mean, evolution should ignore the server's response and
> > > > cancel
> > > > what
> > > > it was about to do. Of course it can't just continue, after the
> > > > "invalid id" response has happened.
> > >
> > > So to repeat what I already said: you're proposing that Evolution
> > > should ignore a server-side error on the supposition that it
> > > might
> > > not
> > > be an error.
> >
> > I wouldn't call the server's response an error. 
>
> We're going round in circles. The server responds with an error
> because
> it *IS AN ERROR*. It was asked for a message which it doesn't have.
> That is an error. It doesn't matter that this was caused by a
> different
> client deleting the message, because the server is not designed to
> tell
> one client what another client is doing, and the IMAP protocol is not
> designed to enable clients to cooperate with each other. Putting it
> bluntly, if your setup is doing this then your setup is wrong, and if
> you don't like it then you need to get a change included in the IMAP
> definition.

It's time to stop this conversation.

Volker