[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: nnimap and searching articles by message-id
From: |
Ted Zlatanov |
Subject: |
Re: nnimap and searching articles by message-id |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:05:38 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:25:11 -0700 (PDT) janko hrasko <jhrasko1@yahoo.com>
wrote:
jh> --- On Sat, 9/19/09, Reiner Steib <reinersteib+gmane@imap.cc> wrote:
>> > It turns out that the IMAP server I am using
>>
>> Which IMAP server software is it?
jh> It is a part of Oracle Beehive collaboration suite.
>>
>> > requires the message-id be stripped of the enclosing
>> angle brackets
>> > when searching for messages like so:
>> >
>> > UID SEARCH HEADER Message-Id "xxxx.yyyy@foobar.com"
>> >
>> > Not sure who is not compliant here: Gnus/nnimap or the
>> IMAP server?
>>
>> Cc-ing the developer list. Maybe someone there
>> knows.
jh> It would be good to know. What do people think? A quick scan through the
RFC2822 - Internet Message Format reveals the following, but I am not sure if
that is enough to convince anyone.
jh> Semantically, the angle bracket characters are not part of the
jh> msg-id; the msg-id is what is contained between the two angle bracket
jh> characters.
jh> Thanks for the patch. It didn't work for what I needed (e.g. fetch
jh> the parent article) until I applied analogous changes to the other
jh> occurrence of search by message-id in nnimap.el:
jh> nnimap-request-article-part.
Can you and Reiner put together a patch? Should be a simple one.
I think stripping off the angle brackets MAY cost some efficiency in
other IMAP servers (maybe they hash by the full message ID), but I don't
know. The SEARCH reference in RFC 3501
(http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3501.txt) says that search by any field is
by contained string, so as far as the standard is concerned stripping
off the angle brackets is harmless. I would make it a user option
unless we're sure Courier, Dovecot, Exchange, and UW IMAP will work the
same way with and without the change.
Ted