Sorry for top posting, my client is still broken. I have never seen the ghost of a "system-alerts" or similar "well-known" mail folder in the past 30 years. Compliance with an RFC obscure feature is compellong us all to clear subscriptions fol ders by hand. As we meet the problem over and over again, a non-RFC configuration option could solve the problem, and it would be very much appreciated... On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:57, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote:> On 23.05.2018 12:31, Rupert Gallagher wrote:>> Dovecot does not clear the subscription file from non-existent folders. > > Hi! > > Thank you for your bug report. Unfortunately this is not a BUG, but mandated behavior by RFC3501, see last two paragraphs in the excerpt. > > Aki Tuomi > > 6.3.6. SUBSCRIBE Command > > Arguments: mailbox > > Responses: no specific responses for this command > > Result: OK - subscribe completed > NO - subscribe failure: can't subscribe to that name > BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid > > The SUBSCRIBE command adds the specified mailbox name to the > server's set of "active" or "subscribed" mailboxes as returned by > the LSUB command. This command returns a tagged OK response only > if the subscription is successful. > > A server MAY validate the mailbox argument to SUBSCRIBE to verify > that it exists. However, it MUST NOT unilaterally remove an > existing mailbox name from the subscription list even if a mailbox > by that name no longer exists. > > Note: This requirement is because a server site can > choose to routinely remove a mailbox with a well-known > name (e.g., "system-alerts") after its contents expire, > with the intention of recreating it when new contents > are appropriate.-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20180523/83adfa22/attachment.html>
I understand that reading that paragraph makes it sounds obscure and outdated. But the problem is that if something deletes & recreates your folder, while you were gone, you would lose the subscription. This includes other MUAs that are in no way obligated to resubscribe to the folder if they do this. Aki On 23.05.2018 23:13, Rupert Gallagher wrote:> Sorry for top posting, my client is still broken.? > > I have never seen the ghost of a "system-alerts" or similar > "well-known" mail?folder in the past 30 years.? > > Compliance with an RFC obscure feature is compellong us all?to?clear > subscriptions fol ders by hand.? > > As we meet the problem over and over again, a non-RFC configuration > option could solve the problem, and it would be very much appreciated... > > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:57, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi > <mailto:aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi>> wrote: > > >?On 23.05.2018 12:31, Rupert Gallagher wrote: >>> Dovecot does not?clear?the?subscription file from non-existent >>> folders.? >> >> Hi! >> >> Thank you for your bug report. Unfortunately this is not a BUG, but >> mandated behavior by RFC3501, see last two paragraphs in the excerpt. >> >> Aki Tuomi >> >> 6.3.6.? SUBSCRIBE Command >> >> ?? Arguments:? mailbox >> >> ?? Responses:? no specific responses for this command >> >> ?? Result:???? OK - subscribe completed >> ?????????????? NO - subscribe failure: can't subscribe to that name >> ?????????????? BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid >> >> ????? The SUBSCRIBE command adds the specified mailbox name to the >> ????? server's set of "active" or "subscribed" mailboxes as returned by >> ????? the LSUB command.? This command returns a tagged OK response only >> ????? if the subscription is successful. >> >> ????? A server MAY validate the mailbox argument to SUBSCRIBE to verify >> ????? that it exists.? However, it MUST NOT unilaterally remove an >> ????? existing mailbox name from the subscription list even if a mailbox >> ????? by that name no longer exists. >> >> ?????????? Note: This requirement is because a server site can >> ?????????? choose to routinely remove a mailbox with a well-known >> ?????????? name (e.g., "system-alerts") after its contents expire, >> ?????????? with the intention of recreating it when new contents >> ?????????? are appropriate.-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20180524/6ff12df0/attachment.html>
If something deletes and recreates the folder, it?s not really the folder to which you subscribed, is it?! On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:33 PM Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote:> I understand that reading that paragraph makes it sounds obscure and > outdated. But the problem is that if something deletes & recreates your > folder, while you were gone, you would lose the subscription. This includes > other MUAs that are in no way obligated to resubscribe to the folder if > they do this. > > Aki > > On 23.05.2018 23:13, Rupert Gallagher wrote: > > Sorry for top posting, my client is still broken. > > I have never seen the ghost of a "system-alerts" or similar "well-known" > mail folder in the past 30 years. > > Compliance with an RFC obscure feature is compellong us all to clear subscriptions > fol ders by hand. > > As we meet the problem over and over again, a non-RFC configuration option > could solve the problem, and it would be very much appreciated... > > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:57, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: > > > On 23.05.2018 12:31, Rupert Gallagher wrote: > > Dovecot does not clear the subscription file from non-existent folders. > > > Hi! > > Thank you for your bug report. Unfortunately this is not a BUG, but > mandated behavior by RFC3501, see last two paragraphs in the excerpt. > > Aki Tuomi > > 6.3.6. SUBSCRIBE Command > > Arguments: mailbox > > Responses: no specific responses for this command > > Result: OK - subscribe completed > NO - subscribe failure: can't subscribe to that name > BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid > > The SUBSCRIBE command adds the specified mailbox name to the > server's set of "active" or "subscribed" mailboxes as returned by > the LSUB command. This command returns a tagged OK response only > if the subscription is successful. > > A server MAY validate the mailbox argument to SUBSCRIBE to verify > that it exists. However, it MUST NOT unilaterally remove an > existing mailbox name from the subscription list even if a mailbox > by that name no longer exists. > > Note: This requirement is because a server site can > choose to routinely remove a mailbox with a well-known > name (e.g., "system-alerts") after its contents expire, > with the intention of recreating it when new contents > are appropriate. > > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20180523/b84d777c/attachment-0001.html>
Well, ok, it is a feature, not a bug. I hope it will qualify as a bug for Thunderbird, because manual edit of the subscription file is just batshit crazy. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 07:33, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote:> I understand that reading that paragraph makes it sounds obscure and outdated. But the problem is that if somethings deletes & recreates your folder, while you were gone, you would lose the subscription. This includes other MUAs that are in no way obligated to resubscribe to the folder if they do this. > > Aki > > On 23.05.2018 23:13, Rupert Gallagher wrote: > >> Sorry for top posting, my client is still broken. >> >> I have never seen the ghost of a "system-alerts" or similar "well-known" mail folder in the past 30 years. >> >> Compliance with an RFC obscure feature is compellong us all to clear subscriptions fol ders by hand. >> >> As we meet the problem over and over again, a non-RFC configuration option could solve the problem, and it would be very much appreciated... >> >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:57, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >> >>> On 23.05.2018 12:31, Rupert Gallagher wrote: >> >>>> Dovecot does not clear the subscription file from non-existent folders. >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> Thank you for your bug report. Unfortunately this is not a BUG, but mandated behavior by RFC3501, see last two paragraphs in the excerpt. >>> >>> Aki Tuomi >>> >>> 6.3.6. SUBSCRIBE Command >>> >>> Arguments: mailbox >>> >>> Responses: no specific responses for this command >>> >>> Result: OK - subscribe completed >>> NO - subscribe failure: can't subscribe to that name >>> BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid >>> >>> The SUBSCRIBE command adds the specified mailbox name to the >>> server's set of "active" or "subscribed" mailboxes as returned by >>> the LSUB command. This command returns a tagged OK response only >>> if the subscription is successful. >>> >>> A server MAY validate the mailbox argument to SUBSCRIBE to verify >>> that it exists. However, it MUST NOT unilaterally remove an >>> existing mailbox name from the subscription list even if a mailbox >>> by that name no longer exists. >>> >>> Note: This requirement is because a server site can >>> choose to routinely remove a mailbox with a well-known >>> name (e.g., "system-alerts") after its contents expire, >>> with the intention of recreating it when new contents >>> are appropriate.-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20180524/4473a5e5/attachment.html>
I'd rather not add RFC-breaking settings. But there's IMAP4rev2 discussion going on in https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra>. Someone motivated enough could perhaps try to suggest changing this behavior in there.> On 23 May 2018, at 23.13, Rupert Gallagher <ruga at protonmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry for top posting, my client is still broken. > > I have never seen the ghost of a "system-alerts" or similar "well-known" mail folder in the past 30 years. > > Compliance with an RFC obscure feature is compellong us all to clear subscriptions fol ders by hand. > > As we meet the problem over and over again, a non-RFC configuration option could solve the problem, and it would be very much appreciated... > > > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:57, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi <mailto:aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi>> wrote: > > > On 23.05.2018 12:31, Rupert Gallagher wrote: >>> Dovecot does not clear the subscription file from non-existent folders. >> >> Hi! >> >> Thank you for your bug report. Unfortunately this is not a BUG, but mandated behavior by RFC3501, see last two paragraphs in the excerpt. >> >> Aki Tuomi >> >> 6.3.6. SUBSCRIBE Command >> >> Arguments: mailbox >> >> Responses: no specific responses for this command >> >> Result: OK - subscribe completed >> NO - subscribe failure: can't subscribe to that name >> BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid >> >> The SUBSCRIBE command adds the specified mailbox name to the >> server's set of "active" or "subscribed" mailboxes as returned by >> the LSUB command. This command returns a tagged OK response only >> if the subscription is successful. >> >> A server MAY validate the mailbox argument to SUBSCRIBE to verify >> that it exists. However, it MUST NOT unilaterally remove an >> existing mailbox name from the subscription list even if a mailbox >> by that name no longer exists. >> >> Note: This requirement is because a server site can >> choose to routinely remove a mailbox with a well-known >> name (e.g., "system-alerts") after its contents expire, >> with the intention of recreating it when new contents >> are appropriate.-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20180524/4fdaafba/attachment.html>
I shall volunteer, not to be chewed, alive, by the lions, on this fine day. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 15:37, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote:> I'd rather not add RFC-breaking settings. But there's IMAP4rev2 discussion going on in https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra. Someone motivated enough could perhaps try to suggest changing this behavior in there. > >> On 23 May 2018, at 23.13, Rupert Gallagher <ruga at protonmail.com> wrote: >> >> Sorry for top posting, my client is still broken. >> >> I have never seen the ghost of a "system-alerts" or similar "well-known" mail folder in the past 30 years. >> >> Compliance with an RFC obscure feature is compellong us all to clear subscriptions fol ders by hand. >> >> As we meet the problem over and over again, a non-RFC configuration option could solve the problem, and it would be very much appreciated... >> >> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:57, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >> >>> On 23.05.2018 12:31, Rupert Gallagher wrote: >> >>>> Dovecot does not clear the subscription file from non-existent folders. >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> Thank you for your bug report. Unfortunately this is not a BUG, but mandated behavior by RFC3501, see last two paragraphs in the excerpt. >>> >>> Aki Tuomi >>> >>> 6.3.6. SUBSCRIBE Command >>> >>> Arguments: mailbox >>> >>> Responses: no specific responses for this command >>> >>> Result: OK - subscribe completed >>> NO - subscribe failure: can't subscribe to that name >>> BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid >>> >>> The SUBSCRIBE command adds the specified mailbox name to the >>> server's set of "active" or "subscribed" mailboxes as returned by >>> the LSUB command. This command returns a tagged OK response only >>> if the subscription is successful. >>> >>> A server MAY validate the mailbox argument to SUBSCRIBE to verify >>> that it exists. However, it MUST NOT unilaterally remove an >>> existing mailbox name from the subscription list even if a mailbox >>> by that name no longer exists. >>> >>> Note: This requirement is because a server site can >>> choose to routinely remove a mailbox with a well-known >>> name (e.g., "system-alerts") after its contents expire, >>> with the intention of recreating it when new contents >>> are appropriate.-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20180524/700ea9fb/attachment-0001.html>