suitable webmail
in [Postfix]
|
From: Stan Hoeppner on 1 Feb 2010 15:39 Carlos Williams put forth on 2/1/2010 10:04 AM: > I recommend and prefer Roundcube. > > http://roundcube.net/ +1 If you're going to offer webmail, you may as well offer IMAP folders instead of POP. JMHO. I'm an ex Squirrelmail user and switched to Roundcube, mainly for the nicer user interface. My Roundcube connects to Dovecot IMAP on the local machine. IIRC, when I logged in the first time it grabbed all the IMAP folders automatically. Back when I originally setup Squirrelmail years ago, I had to subscribe all the folders manually. I'm not sure if this is true of the most recent Squirrelmail though. Other than Roundcube, for a really nice modern AJAX interface, take a look at SOGo. The thing that really impresses me is the right click context menus like those available in Thunderbird or other GUI mail clients. I ended up going with Roundcube as I thought SOGo was a bit "heavy" for my needs. Give the demo a go and see what you think: http://www.scalableogo.org/english/tour/online_demo.html -- Stan
From: Jaroslaw Grzabel on 1 Feb 2010 16:10 K bharathan wrote: > hi all > of course this is a non postfix topic; but i'd like to know from the > experienced which webmail is best for a postfix pop server > i'd also have it configured for user soft quota > guidance appreciated I would add from my side... Horde IMP. If you need good replacement for Microsoft Outlook, Horde will definitely meet all your requirements... and default interface is compatible with mobiles so you can have very light version of webmail. Configuration is a bit pain but configured once stays online forever ;-). > thanks > Regards, Jarek
From: Charles Marcus on 1 Feb 2010 17:17 On 2010-02-01 4:05 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > My Roundcube package is currently up to date, and it is a standard > Debian package: > > [02:21:52][root(a)greer]/$ aptitude show roundcube > Package: roundcube > New: yes > State: installed > Automatically installed: no > Version: 0.2.2-1~bpo50+1 Eh? 0.3.1 is the current version, so how is 0.2.2 'up to date'? -- Best regards, Charles
From: fakessh on 1 Feb 2010 17:30 On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:17:49 -0500, Charles Marcus <CMarcus(a)Media-Brokers.com> wrote: > On 2010-02-01 4:05 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> My Roundcube package is currently up to date, and it is a standard >> Debian package: >> >> [02:21:52][root(a)greer]/$ aptitude show roundcube >> Package: roundcube >> New: yes >> State: installed >> Automatically installed: no >> Version: 0.2.2-1~bpo50+1 > > Eh? 0.3.1 is the current version, so how is 0.2.2 'up to date'? attention 0.3.1 is the current version , so 0.2.2 is 'up to date'
From: Ralf Hildebrandt on 1 Feb 2010 17:31
* fakessh <fakessh(a)fakessh.eu>: > > Eh? 0.3.1 is the current version, so how is 0.2.2 'up to date'? > > attention > > 0.3.1 is the current version , so 0.2.2 is 'up to date' That's probably some sort of twisted Debian humor .) |