Subject: saving in sorted order

From: Barry Landy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 14:35:35 +0000 (GMT)

In 3.91, the following used to work:

Sort a folder ($ something)
Select all messages (; a)
Save all messages to a new folder (A S)

and the new folder contains all the messages in the original folder in
the new order. In Pine 3.92/3.93 (at least in the Windows and OS2
ports) this no longer appears to work. Instead the messages in the new
folder are in the same order as the old folder.

This seems to me to be a major change of spec that deserves a very fast
release of 3.94......

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Landy                        Computer Laboratory:+44 1223 334600
Head of Systems and Development    Direct line:        +44 1223 334713
University of Cambridge Computing Service
New Museums Site                   Email:[email-masked]
Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG

---

From: Thomas Unger <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 10:07:54 -0700 (PDT)

I remember trying this on the 3.91 version on UNIX and finding that it did
not work.  That is, the items are saved in original order, not sorted
order.  It would be nice if one could do this.  I don't think this is
pc/windows specific.

Tom.

---

From: Barry Landy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 22:00:08 +0000 (GMT)

Sorry, but it does indeed work in unix pine 3.91.

On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Thomas Unger wrote:

:>
:>I remember trying this on the 3.91 version on UNIX and finding that it did
:>not work.  That is, the items are saved in original order, not sorted
:>order.  It would be nice if one could do this.  I don't think this is
:>pc/windows specific.
:>
:>Tom.
:>
:>
:>On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Barry Landy wrote:
:>
:>> In 3.91, the following used to work:
:>>
:>> Sort a folder ($ something)
:>> Select all messages (; a)
:>> Save all messages to a new folder (A S)
:>>
:>> and the new folder contains all the messages in the original folder in
:>> the new order. In Pine 3.92/3.93 (at least in the Windows and OS2
:>> ports) this no longer appears to work. Instead the messages in the new
:>> folder are in the same order as the old folder.
:>>
:>> This seems to me to be a major change of spec that deserves a very fast
:>> release of 3.94......
:>>
:>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:>> Barry Landy                        Computer Laboratory:+44 1223 334600
:>> Head of Systems and Development    Direct line:        +44 1223 334713
:>> University of Cambridge Computing Service
:>> New Museums Site                   Email:[email-masked]
:>> Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG
:>>
:>>
:>>
:>>
:>
:>

---

From: Terry Gray <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 16:49:45 -0700 (PDT)

Barry,
Does it work in 3.91 with *exactly* the same configuration?
Here's what we think is happening:

A "Save" in Pine to a remote mailbox can result in either an IMAP "APPEND"
command, or an IMAP "COPY" command.  COPY is used if the source and
destination folders are on the same server and in the same format.
Alas, it turns out that there is an ambiguity in the IMAP spec concerning
the order messages are saved in a COPY command.  The UW IMAP server does
not (yet) honor the order of the messages specified by the client in the
argument to the COPY command, but instead copies them in the order they
exist in the source folder.

If you have a case where 3.91 and 3.93 behave differently using an
identical configuration (i.e. where both are using the COPY command)
then we need some more data.  (Likewise if you are seeing the problem in
cases where APPEND would be used, or in a local folder case, we need to
understand that as well.)

Thanks.

-teg

---

From: Barry Landy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 08:23:35 +0100 (BST)

On Wed, 24 Apr 1996, Terry Gray wrote:

:>Barry,
:>Does it work in 3.91 with *exactly* the same configuration?
:>Here's what we think is happening:
:>
:>A "Save" in Pine to a remote mailbox can result in either an IMAP "APPEND"
:>command, or an IMAP "COPY" command.  COPY is used if the source and
:>destination folders are on the same server and in the same format.
:>Alas, it turns out that there is an ambiguity in the IMAP spec concerning
:>the order messages are saved in a COPY command.  The UW IMAP server does
:>not (yet) honor the order of the messages specified by the client in the
:>argument to the COPY command, but instead copies them in the order they
:>exist in the source folder.
:>
:>If you have a case where 3.91 and 3.93 behave differently using an
:>identical configuration (i.e. where both are using the COPY command)
:>then we need some more data.  (Likewise if you are seeing the problem in
:>cases where APPEND would be used, or in a local folder case, we need to
:>understand that as well.)
:>

Well, of course I cannot guarantee what IMAP codes the implementations 
are using. I can only report the facts as a humble user sees them.

Doing EXACTLY the same operations on exactly the same folders stored on 
the same host, using a variety of versions of PINE give different results.
Specifically:

Solaris 2 unix 3.91, and Windows 3.91 copy in the sorted order 
     (so I assume they are using APPEND)

Windows 3.92 and 3.93 and OS2 3.92 copy in the original order
     (so I assume they are using COPY)

I do not have Unix 3.92/3.93 yet (I am waiting for some busy people to 
compile them), and I have not tried the DOS versions.

---

From: Barry Landy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 08:28:19 +0100 (BST)

> understand that as well.)

Further to the previous - I remembered that here is a trial 3.92 unix, so
I tried that, and it does the same as 3.92 windows etc, and is different
to the 3.91 unix version.

For the unix cases, the folders are LOCAL, for the Windows/OS2 cases the
folders are remote (IMAP accessed).

I hope that is enough data.

=======================================================================
Barry Landy, Head of Systems and Development,
University of Cambridge Computing Service
[email-masked]      0-1223-334713   +44-1223-334713

---

From: Simon <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 16:07:04 +0100

Yeah, I've also noticed this. I actually reported this as a bug. I noticed it
when saving a few selected messages from my INBOX, which were sorted by date,
to a  single folder. If the  messages hadn't actually arrived  in date order,
then they  weren't saved in the  order I wanted.  So now, I'm having  to save
messages individually! :(

 ___  _                    _a' /(   <.  #  Simon Bradley: Knight Protector  #
/ __><_>._ _ _  ___ ._ _~~ _}\ \(  _  ) #      E-mail: [email-masked]      #
\__ \| || ' ' |/ . \| ' |     \(,_(,)'  #   Finger: [email-masked]    #
<___/|_||_|_|_|\___/|_|_|    ._>, _>,   # URL: http://www.aber.ac.uk/~syb3/ #

On 24 Apr 1996, Barry Landy wrote:

> and the new folder contains all the  messages in the original folder in the
> new order. In Pine  3.92/3.93 (at least in the Windows  and OS2 ports) this
> no longer appears  to work. Instead the  messages in the new  folder are in
> the same order as the old folder.
>