Re: [Evolution] Would this have side effects ?

[Zan Lynx <zlynx acm org>]

On 2/6/21 9:06 AM, Volker Wysk wrote:
> I've had the situation that the IMAP server didn't "manage concurrent
> connections to one account in a sane manner".
>
> This is what happened. I had two clients listening to one IMAP server with
> IMAP IDLE (evolution and getmail). It happened that both clients saw a new
> mail and tried to download it (or part of it, like the header). One client
> came first and deleted the message from the server. Then the second one got
> an error, because it tried to retrieve a message that was no longer there.
> In evolution (when being the second one), I got an error message "Cannot get
> message...".

One of the clients deleted (and expunged I assume) the message?

This "problem" falls into the set of "problems" that are user error.

OBVIOUSLY, if an email message is deleted then it is gone. The question 
then would be why one of your clients is configured to do that?

I don't see what kind of "sane manner" you could expect here. It is 
exactly like a shared filesystem on a network server. If one client 
deletes a file, and then a second client tries to open that file, the 
file isn't there! It was deleted!

If you are using getmail to retrieve your email and then delete it, then 
do not point any other clients at that IMAP server. Use a local IMAP 
server and have getmail deliver to that local server. Then point 
Evolution at the local server.

Or use a local Maildir. Although I remember a few bugs with Evolution 
and simultaneous Maildir access, it has been a long time and I assume 
they were fixed. Because of course Evolution wants to play well with 
others. Right?

Or I see, checking the documentation for getmail, that there's a 
"delete_after" option that will only delete messages after leaving them 
on the server for a while.

--
                Knowledge is Power -- Power Corrupts
                        Study Hard -- Be Evil