Re: IMAP shared mailboxes: issues with kmail?

Am Mittwoch 21 Januar 2009 schrieb Ingo Klöcker:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2009, Wilhelm Meier wrote:
> > Am Dienstag 20 Januar 2009 schrieb Ingo Klöcker:
> > > I'm subscribed to kdepim-users, so replying to the list
> > > suffices.
> > >
> > > On Tuesday 20 January 2009, Wilhelm Meier wrote:
> > > > Am Dienstag 20 Januar 2009 schrieb Ingo Klöcker:
> > > > > On Monday 19 January 2009, Wilhelm Meier wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > are there any known issues with
> > > > > > symlinked-shared-mailboxes and kmail?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I use dovecot with virtual users (LDAP), so there are no
> > > > > > unix-permissions related
> > > > > > problems here: all mailboxes are owned by the local user
> > > > > > vmail.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Each user maildir has some symlinks to shared mailboxes.
> > > > > > This works fine if I use squirrelmail as a MUA.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > kmail instead seems to have some problems: if I save a
> > > > > > mail into the shared-folder, the other users are seeing
> > > > > > this new mail almost immediately. But if I delete(!) a
> > > > > > mail from the shared-folder, the list of the other kmails
> > > > > > remains untouch. Refreshing does nothing. I have to close
> > > > > > kmail and restart.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is this related to some sort of wrong config of the
> > > > > > shared mailboxes or is this a (known) dovecot <-> kmail
> > > > > > problem?
> > > > >
> > > > > KMail does not watch its folder storage for changes. So it
> > > > > is by design (we wanted to keep it simple) that a running
> > > > > KMail does not notice all changes done by other processes.
> > > >
> > > > If I turn on "auto-expunge=true" the mail-files in the
> > > > MDA-storage (MDA=dovecot) are deleted, but only if I select
> > > > the INBOX in KMail instance which did the deletion. In this
> > > > case the other KMails instance see the changes if they
> > > > refresh the list.
> > > >
> > > > This would be fine, if I hadn't select the INDOX. It would be
> > > > better if the expunging takes place immediately or after a
> > > > timeout / refresh-timeval.
> > >
> > > Ahh, misunderstanding. The different KMails are all using IMAP
> > > to access the shared folders. Correct?
> > >
> > > For technical reasons KMail does not support change
> > > notifications by the IMAP server. But I still do not really
> > > understand what problems you are observing. You delete a
> > > message in a shared folder with one KMail, but other KMails
> > > notice that the message has been deleted only after a restart?
> >
> > Yes, mostly.
> >
> > If auto-expunge=false, the other KMail only notice the deleted
> > message after restart. In this case the mail-files (on the
> > impa-server) get deleted when the KMail starts.
> >
> > If auto-expunge=true, the messages vanishes in another KMails
> > list (if I select a random other folder and then select the
> > shared folder again), if the first KMail compresses the folder on
> > a
> > context-menu-action or if I switch to the INBOX.
> >
> > So, I think here are two problems:
> >
> > 1) the expunge of the KMail deleting the message should take
> > place immediately or after some timeout without the need to
> > select the INBOX
>
> Hmm. AFAIK expunging should not be necessary. If a message is
> marked as deleted in a folder all other MUAs accessing this folder
> will immediately notice that the message is marked as deleted.

Reading you comment below I wonder how KMail is doing this. Or do you 
mean that the MUAs should notice the status change of the message on 
the next polling?

If I do a refresh in KMail it seems that KMail does not recognize the 
status change.

> > 2) the notification of the expunged message should reach the
> > other KMail, even if I stay in the shared-folder.
>
> Due to technical reasons KMail cannot listen to IMAP notifications.
> The workaround is polling, i.e. frequently checking for changes.

see above, please

>
> Quite frankly, I think the problem really is with your setup. You
> make the assumption that symlinking the storage of the IMAP server
> should work, but apparently it does not work because the deleted
> flags are not shared among the symlinked instances of the shared
> folder. Is symlinking really the standard procedure for sharing
> folders with dovecot? Hmm, according to [1] it is, another option
> being namespaces.
>
> I suggest to ask for help/advice on the dovecot mailing list
> because to me this seems to be a problem with the symlinking
> approach for sharing folders and not a problem with KMail.

Well, I asked the dovecot-people and they said it the other way round: 
KMail should handle status changes done by other MUAs or other 
instances of the same MUA.

>
> Regards,
> Ingo
>
>
> [1] http://wiki.dovecot.org/SharedMailboxes

-- 
Wilhelm