On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 10:59:43AM -0700, Chris Cutler wrote:
> > I've been developing mutt's IMAP support against three IMAP4rev1
> > servers: UW-IMAP, Cyrus, and (occasionally) courier. There is some
> > code hanging around for handling pre-rev1 IMAP4 servers, but I haven't
> > made any attempts to test it (although I've tried to avoid breaking
> > it). Anything earlier than that I doubt would work. Are there still
> > IMAP servers in the wild which don't conform to at least IMAP4?
>
> Actually, I think my question was misleading. . . what I intended to
> ask was how much of the IMAP4rev1 standard mutt currently implements.
> (I only mentioned earlier standards in order to differentiate.) It
> sounds, from discussion on this list, like mutt is pretty good in
> this respect, but the README in the imap directory of the 1.2.4
> distribution does not inspire confidence.
>
Yes, I think the comments in the 1.2.4 documentation are firstly
rather out of date and secondly being very cautious.
Mutt's IMAP4 support is good and implements the IMAP4 'philosopy' much
better than most MUAs in my opinion. The only MUAs that I have found
which are in the same league (vis-a-vis IMAP support) are:-
tkRat
Netscape (yes, really, it has the right idea!)
pegasus (win32)
eudora (win32)
plus, possibly, but I haven't really tried them much:-
mulberry
althea
Most other MUAs sseem to think that IMAP4 is a sort of extended POP3
and if you start with that idea you get it completely wrong.
--
Chris Green ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.isbd.co.uk/
