[imp] window resizing

[Chuck Hagenbuch]

Quoting Alain Fauconnet <alain@cscoms.net>:

> Anyway, reading this list, I was left with the impression that quite a
> few problems had been tracked down to be  bugs  in  IE  for  which  no
> workaround in IMP would be considered, but if I'm misled, sorry.  Must
> be old outdated info. Time flies.

I'm not aware of any large issues that don't work with IMP 2.2.x and IE. I might
be missing something minor, but I think we're in good shape overall.

> Well it's not. Unless it's not supposed  to ?  See  my  former  mails.
> Obviously  it's  not  sending  back  the  form data when reloading the
> frame.  I  only vaguely suspected that this could be the source of the
> problem, but Rich seemed positive that is was! So I am confused now...

Read the rest of what I wrote: when two frames load at the same time, and one of
them fails authentication, _all_ frames are then logged out, because IMP has to
assume that login failed and that you're logged out now. Closing the session.

> Er... do you mean that both the top and left frames each also  open  a
> POP session when reloaded ? I see that for the top frame  indeed,  but
> not for the left one.

Top right and top left. The menu doesn't need one, and possibly for pop3 we
don't in the top left (shouldn't, since there are no folders), but you still
have two at a time.

> Honestly, I wouldn't consider qpopper as broken on this.
> A second session should not be allowed when there's one  active,
> sould it ?
> BTW I've just done a quick test with UW ipop3d and it behaves the same
> way. Second session fails: "-ERR Can't get lock.  Mailbox in use".

Hmm. I don't believe that IMAP acts that way - is there a chance you could use
imap to access the same mail (you could turn off folders, even, and there
wouldn't be much difference to the user).

As for not allowing it - it's reasonable, sure, though it'd be better if
authentication worked and you got a read-only session, or something similar...

-chuck

--
Charles Hagenbuch, <chuck@horde.org>
Many states consider gambling so immoral that they not only prohibit private
gambling organizations, they thoughtfully provide their own.