Re: [Imap-protocol] Seeking clarity on Gmail "Access for less secure apps" setting for non XOAuth2 access

This makes me sad.

On Saturday, August 30, 2014 2:43:16 AM CEST, Andrew Sutherland wrote:
> For example, we already explicitly detect the Gmail specific 
> "NO [ALERT]" cases of things like the following:
> - Application-specific password required
> - Your account is not enabled for IMAP use.
> - IMAP access is disabled for your domain.

As if 5530 didn't exist.

> and want to better handle:
> - Please log in via your web browser: 
> http://support.google.com/mail/accounts/bin/answer.py?answer=78754 
> (Failure)

There is a response code for that, WEBALERT. Not standard, but at least 
it's better than trying to have a client parsing human-readable text.

> I believe this new failure adds another specialized error code 
> (and regrettably, we screw up here, mea culpa.)
>
> Knowing what the string would be, whether it's localized, etc. 
> would be handy.  We do these detections to try and provide 
> appropriately localized error messages that might provide better 
> context to the user and differentiate between persistent 
> failures and transient failures (ex: NO [UNAVAILABLE]), although 
> I should be clear these are insufficiently researched hacks.

The point of 5530 and that registry was that clients should not need to do 
such things. IMO Google screws up by not defininig response codes, not you.

Arnt

_______________________________________________
Imap-protocol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol