When migrating some tests from jmap draft to jmap rfc, an issue was identified regarding conflicts introduced via IMAP on keywords when trying to solve it via jmap email/set method
If we have a message m1 in 2 mailboxes m1 and m2, if we add a flag \Flagged via IMAP on the message in mailbox m2, we create an inconsistency for JMAP. Normally, if we set via email/set the flag to $Flagged for m1, it should fix the inconsistency, having the keyword for the message present in both mailboxes.
However, it does not happen right now, as it seems when doing an update on email, we do union of keywords regarding the metadata, and if it's the same as new flags (which is the case here) then we do nothing, thus not fixing the inconsistency.
The fix is a bit tricky, as some simple solution have been attempted while creating issues elsewhere.
need to investigate deeper and fix the issue for JMAP RFC implementation
Arsnael
commented
3 months ago
When migrating some tests from jmap draft to jmap rfc, an issue was identified regarding conflicts introduced via IMAP on keywords when trying to solve it via jmap email/set method
If we have a message m1 in 2 mailboxes m1 and m2, if we add a flag
\Flaggedvia IMAP on the message in mailbox m2, we create an inconsistency for JMAP. Normally, if we set via email/set the flag to$Flaggedfor m1, it should fix the inconsistency, having the keyword for the message present in both mailboxes.However, it does not happen right now, as it seems when doing an update on email, we do union of keywords regarding the metadata, and if it's the same as new flags (which is the case here) then we do nothing, thus not fixing the inconsistency.
The fix is a bit tricky, as some simple solution have been attempted while creating issues elsewhere.
need to investigate deeper and fix the issue for JMAP RFC implementation