ark3 at email.com
Mon Jun 23 00:51:45 EDT 2003
On Sunday, June 22, 2003, at 11:11 PM, Meyer, Tony wrote:
>>> The way to check this would be to see if 'NotJunk' is indeed missing
>>> from a PERMANENTFLAGS response (the -i4 switch is good for this).
>> Doubtful that I'll get to it soon.
> For the moment, I've checked in a change that means that imapfilter
> will try to append without flags if they are causing a problem (a
> warning is printed out). This does mean that all flags (seen, draft,
> etc) will be lost. It would be interesting to know if this solves the
I'll give both a spin in the next day or so (checking P...FLAGS and
trying your modification).
> If anyone has both time and access to a server that has messages with
> this 'NotJunk' flag, then they could play around and figure out what
> the rules about it are.
I'll poke at this as well.
And thanks for correcting my misunderstanding about how flags are
supposed to work. Obviously, I should read the RFC, especially if I am
to contribute a patch that doesn't break things for other servers.
Should we move this discussion to -dev?
More information about the Spambayes