Subject: [imapext] MOVE

From: Timo Sirainen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 06:27:47 +0300

I implemented the current draft to upcoming Dovecot v2.2. If target
mailbox doesn't exist it returns [TRYCREATE], just like COPY. Actually I
implemented it as a small "move" flag on top of the existing COPY code,
so their functionality is pretty much identical. It doesn't advertise
the MOVE capability yet, just in case if the spec still changes.

---

From: Timo Sirainen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 07:15:30 +0300

> the MOVE capability yet, just in case if the spec still changes.

Also: Since the same code could be used to implement both, it would be trivial for me to add support for (non-UID) MOVE command. Since COPY already allows server to send EXPUNGEs, I don't think there would be any problems with adding it to the spec. But then again, I don't know if anyone actually wants to use it and if it would be more difficult for others to implement. I don't really have an opinion on if it should exist or not.

---

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 08:21:57 +0200

On 06/20/2012 05:27 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> It doesn't advertise

I think there's a 50% chance the spec will change, to add MSN-based MOVE.

IIRC Cyrus as client author would like to use MSNs to move messages, 
Adrien as server author had problems with it. Noone else has mentioned 
any substantive preference as far as I can recall. (Several people have 
mentioned a principled preference that MOVE should have both MSN- and 
UID-based commands, because so many other IMAP commands do.)

Arnt

---

From: Bron Gondwana <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:36:10 +0200

> Also: Since the same code could be used to implement both, it would be trivial for me to add support for (non-UID) MOVE command. Since COPY already allows server to send EXPUNGEs, I don't think the…

I support both in Cyrus - and indeed I did it exactly the same way, a simple
flag to COPY called "ismove" which causes it to run the expunge as well.

non-UID is nice to use from TELNET sessions at least :)

Bron.
-- 
  Bron Gondwana
  [email-masked]

---

From: Cyrus Daboo <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:59:42 -0400

Hi Arnt,

> UID-based commands, because so many other IMAP commands do.)

I can live without MSN support if it really is a blocking issue, but just 
for completeness it seems to me we ought to have it. But since virtually no 
one actually uses my client now, my preference should not block progress.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:12:47 +0200

On 06/20/2012 04:59 PM, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> I can live without MSN support if it really is a blocking issue, but
> just for completeness it seems to me we ought to have it. But since
> virtually no one actually uses my client now, my preference should not
> block progress.

I too would prefer to have it, if we can have it without the kind of 
soul-destroying discussion that we've had over each previous MOVE proposal.

There are, at last count, 11 servers that either have MOVE, have 
committed to it, or have some *MOVE of their own. IMO, if all 11 can do 
MSN-based MOVE and none of us find a terrible problem with its 
specification, then my intuition is to include it. Uniformity is not a 
bad trait in protocols.

Arnt