On 2000-01-13 12:54:07 -0500, Bennett Todd wrote:
> 2000-01-13-12:50:49 Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS:
> > Nice, but some people want to leave mail on the server so that
> > they can access it from other places as well.
Not only that, take a corporate situation where the mail could be
sensitive - you don't want to be (or possibly, policy dictates you won't
be) running around the countryside with your laptop full of corporate
secrets rather than them protected on a mail system on a secure network.
> Sure. Are those same people the same ones who are also asking for
> filtering into different folders, and who cannot run procmail on
> their server?
Quite possibly. Many IMAP servers implement their own authentication
system that doesn't involve system password files. Two obvious benefits
of this is 1) you're not limited to sizeof(uid_t) number of users you
can deliver mail to, and 2) with no user accounts there's far less
chance of the system being cracked. The MTA uses the IMAP server's MDA
(which doesn't do filtering) to deliver. With no account on the system,
you can't login to it and setup procmail - and I doubt the postmaster
will want to be setting up the system to sometimes run procmail,
sometimes run the IMAP MDA depending on whether a particular person
(remember, there's no users) wants their mail filtered or not.
Sieve is a better method but apparently the only IMAP server I know that
has it (devel Cyrus) doesn't compile.
> If so, then perhaps the functionality they want could be achieved by
> using fetchmail on their client piping into a procmail that's then
> piping into an imap-writing utility.
[--- snip ---]
All I can say to this is I wouldn't go recommending a mail system I
wouldn't be happy to use myself every day of the week :)
> But this isn't a limitation of the implementation, it's a limit of
> the goal specified. Better not to go there.
A limitation of the goal... that's a new one to me!
I'm not arguing for altering mutt in any way, just pointing out that
fetchmail + procmail can't solve everyone's problems.
folder-hook ! T~Cmutt-users\r;s =mutt-users\r
My only prob with the above is dealing with the case where no messages
are tagged...
--
Matt
