On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 10:33:05AM +0000, Chris Green wrote: > On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:21:31PM +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote: > > On 08Dec2014 22:04, Chris Green <c...@isbd.net> wrote: > > >Doesn't anyone use IMAP? I must admit when I tried it (a few times > > >over the years, but not very recently) it never felt quite as easy and > > >transparent as using mutt on a local mail spool. > > > > I would advocate trying offlineimap. I am a huge fan of having one's > > mail local to the machine for all the reasons you have outlined. > > > [snip] > > Well, looking at offlineimap has lead me to notmuch as well which has > got me thinking down those lines too! :-) > > However, for me, moving to offlineimap involves quite a bit of > reconfiguration work as I currently use mbox and I don't have an IMAP > server running on the machine where the E-Mails initially get > delivered. > > So I just need to decide which of many possible routes will serve me > best.
If we all misunderstood and you have multiple instances of mutt running and want to be able to access your mail from any of them then use POP and leave the email on the server. Are you forced to use IMAP? /jl -- ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) Powered by Lemote Fuloong against HTML e-mail X Loongson MIPS and OpenBSD and proprietary / \ http://www.mutt.org attachments / \ Code Blue or Go Home! Encrypted email preferred PGP Key 2048R/DA65BC04
