Prev: How to route mail that was on HOLD?
Next: RBL Usage questions
From: Timo Sirainen on 12 Apr 2010 13:03
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 11:17 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:

> I too would have expected a new IMAP extension that would allow the IMAP
> client to ask the IMAP server to post the message. I don't know why this
> route was not taken.

Lemonade group discussed this in their "push vs pull" arguments. I
didn't follow Lemonade back then, so I can't give any reasons why pull
was chosen. This was anyway a conscious design decision made by the
majority of people in the group.

A quick google search found a draft for the push method:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gellens-lemonade-push-00

My personal opinion is that:

1) BURL seems somewhat similar to how email clients already behave. They
already save message to IMAP server and send it to SMTP server. BURL
keeps this behavior, it just replaces DATA command with BURL (plus of
course requires the client to first register the IMAP URL).

2) Embedding SMTP commands among IMAP traffic seems a bit ugly too. For
just MAIL FROM and RCPT TO it's probably not too horrible, but what
about (future) SMTP extensions, should they be somehow also supported?

Anyway, I don't think there is much choice anymore. Either implement
BURL that has at least a chance of becoming popular (and with Apple now
implementing it, especially if their future clients will support it,
there is some chance) or try to implement your own non-standard way that
will work only in some specific random installations.
From: Timo Sirainen on 12 Apr 2010 13:05
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 12:13 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-04-12 12:03 PM, Simon Waters wrote:
> > Some days I think starting again from scratch with software would be a good
> > idea, then I remember how quickly I can code....
>
> Timo (dovecot author) has expressed interest in maybe someday coding an
> IMAP client from scratch... one can only hope... ;)

Not my client and not really even usable yet, but it started with the
right ideas: http://trojita.flaska.net/

I could see myself continuing it instead of starting from scratch..

From: Charles Marcus on 12 Apr 2010 16:55
On 2010-04-12 1:05 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Not my client and not really even usable yet, but it started with the
> right ideas: http://trojita.flaska.net/
>
> I could see myself continuing it instead of starting from scratch..

Like I said, one can only hope... but I'm conflicted... too bad you
can't clone yourself, because there are still some things I'm really
looking forward to in dovecot, like single instance storage...

--

Best regards,

Charles

From: Stan Hoeppner on 13 Apr 2010 03:36
Steve put forth on 4/12/2010 10:56 AM:

> AFAIK Outlook often saves the messages in a local Sent folder if you use Outlook as a pure IMAP client. On the IMAP server nothing gets saved.
>
> But you are right. All the other clients that I know save the message on the server or at least are able to save the message on the server. I never managed to do that with Outlook without fancy macros/rules.

In Thunderbird this is user configurable, though I believe the default for
IMAP "accounts" is to create a "Sent" folder on the server and save them there.

In fact, TB is so flexible here that one could have a dozen IMAP accounts
configured, and could save all sent item copies for all accounts in the
"kermit-the-frog" folder in just one of the accounts, or could dedicate one
account to nothing but the "kermit-the-frog" sent items folder. Or this
folder could be a local folder. Lots of flexibility here in TB.

--
Stan

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: How to route mail that was on HOLD?
Next: RBL Usage questions