[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Expire and Delete again

To: j.krinke@gmx.de
Subject: Re: Expire and Delete again
From: Simon Josefsson <jas@pdc.kth.se>
Date: 26 Sep 1999 14:53:02 +0200
Cc: nnimap@extundo.com
In-Reply-To: Jens Krinke's message of "Fri, 24 Sep 1999 13:49:52 -0400"
References: <d8hso45uuri.fsf@aruba.fmi.uni-passau.de> <vafaeqcd5gz.fsf@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <37EB7E3E.6A229A50@watson.ibm.com> <m1bpuz85l3q.fsf@blackbird.mitre.org> <37EBB9C0.80F7C7EF@watson.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.070096 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.96) Emacs/20.4

Jens Krinke <jkrinke@watson.ibm.com> writes:

>  DS> that Netscape does.  As I recall from earlier discussion on this
> list
>  DS> (is the list archived?) the gnus-deleted mark is specifically
> designed 
>  DS> to support Gnus idea of expiry, which I think is not what you
>  DS> want.
> 
> IMHO Gnus idea of expiry is much more similar to the imap concept of
> delete than Gnus idea of deletion.

I agree with this. The only thing that separates Gnus's "expire" with
IMAP's "deleted" is that OTHER clients does not have the same
flexibility that Gnus have to determine WHICH of the
expired/delete-marked articles should be remove right now.

References:
- Expire and Delete again
  - From: Jens Krinke <j.krinke@gmx.de>
- Re: Expire and Delete again
  - From: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE (Kai Großjohann)
- Re: Expire and Delete again
  - From: Jens Krinke <jkrinke@watson.ibm.com>
- Re: Expire and Delete again
  - From: dsg@mitre.org (David S. Goldberg)
- Re: Expire and Delete again
  - From: Jens Krinke <jkrinke@watson.ibm.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Expire and Delete again
Next by Date: Re: Expire and Delete again
Prev by thread: Re: Expire and Delete again
Next by thread: Re: Expire and Delete again
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread