On Sat, 09 Apr 2011 02:47:00 +1200, Donn Cave <donn@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Quoth Anshul Singhle <xashck@xxxxxxxxx>,... It says here that EXPUNGE is an expensive operation and it is recommended that usersshould not EXPUNGE frequently. Therefore, on deletion it would be better tomove the file to "trash" and also set the /Deleted flag.Yes. EXPUNGE for every remove would be poor design for this reason.This might cause a problem. Who will set the trash folder? the user? perhapswhen the user is setting up his account we can check for a folder named"Trash" and if it doesn't exist, we can ask the user to specify the trashfolder.I think that's a key point - IMAP protocol itself does not say anything about trash folders, and the existence of any such thing on IMAP server accounts is due to client applications. An initial implemention to the protocol would, in my opinion, do well to just use the Trash Can metaphor *per folder* as a way to present messages with \Delete flag set. (So remove means apply remote \Delete flag & move locally to folder's trash.) Other clients should be able to deal with \Delete flags, as it's clearly the way it's done in IMAP.
by the way gmail automatically expunge mails when setting the \Delete flag...
Clemens