none
Loose Catch-Up Test (3) RRS feed

  • Question

  • In addition to all WLMail's new quirks, proof that Loose Catch-Up still
    exists in it:
     
    <bridge_debug>
    ClassifyCommand: XHDR References 1100-1103
    Received: Command: XHDR, Parameters: References 1100-1103
    Received: Response: 1100
    <1a9c5196-5fdf-4e73-84ff-fb186fd4e26d@communitybridge.codeplex.com>
     
    Received: Response: 1101
    <1a9c5196-5fdf-4e73-84ff-fb186fd4e26d@communitybridge.codeplex.com>
     
    Received: Response: 1102
    <276c0114-ac8a-4086-b832-fdcd09fd72e1@communitybridge.codeplex.com>
     
    Received: Response: 1103
    <adb7c810-a2f3-41da-896f-8fbd6ba6e2d9@communitybridge.codeplex.com>
     
    ClassifyCommand: XHDR Subject 1100-1103
    Received: Command: XHDR, Parameters: Subject 1100-1103
    Received: Response: 1100 Re: Loose Catch-Up Test (2)
     
    Received: Response: 1101 Re: Loose Catch-Up Test (2)
     
    Received: Response: 1102 Re: Loose Catch-Up Test (2)
     
    Received: Response: 1103 Re: Loose Catch-Up Test (1)
     
    ClassifyCommand: ARTICLE 1103
    Received: Command: ARTICLE, Parameters: 1103
    Received: Response: 220 1103
    <c15b5913-a6be-4b29-a43b-dc9d19551603@communitybridge.codeplex.com> article
    retrieved - head and body follow
    From: Robert Aldwinckle on forums <robald@techemail.com>
    Subject: Re: Loose Catch-Up Test (1)
    </bridge_debug>
     
    IOW there will be no XOVER to get headers for 1100-1102 so those messages
    will be lost, unless I go back for them. (QED.)
     
    That was for Synchronize Newsgroup. Now I need to go back and do this for
    the other synchronize commands. What's encouraging is that Synchronize All
    may still act as a workaround. I don't like using it as much as I once did
    and may resort to using Headers (toolbar button) after doing any synchronize
    command, especially Synchronize Newsgroup, just to be sure that everything
    gets picked up. I'll have to trace that too because it looks as if Headers
    may be doing more than just simply going back 300 at a time but I'm not sure
    when it starts that behaviour. E.g. it looks (off hand) as if at some
    point it starts thinking about going back to try to get "some more" new (or
    changed) headers and doing that in sets of 300. In any case not as
    straightforward as the UI might imply. More blackbox testing and reverse
    engineering forced by poor design and closed source. ; ]
     
    BTW this is all with the latest WLMail (Build 14.0.8117.0416) so clearly
    nothing was done in this area. Did OE ever really fix this? Who knows?
    I don't have XP any more to test and find out.
     
     
    Saturday, June 12, 2010 6:59 PM