On 2/24/10 8:37 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
1) Online mode: Don't download all message headers at once at startup.
If I open a mailbox, I'm seeing only about 20 messages on screen. That's
all it needs to download. When I scroll the message list, download more
as needed.
I disagree.
You are c
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:48 PM, WJCarpenter wrote:
Subscriptions themselves aren't an abuse of IMAP, obviously, as
they are in the spec. A client that *by default* uses them to hide
folders is abusing them, for exactly the reasons I explained. They
are non-portable because:
I agree 100% t
Subscriptions themselves aren't an abuse of IMAP, obviously, as they
are in the spec. A client that *by default* uses them to hide folders
is abusing them, for exactly the reasons I explained. They are
non-portable because:
I agree 100% that hiding folders by default is bad, but I've never s
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 24.2.2010, at 22.08, WJCarpenter wrote:
This use of subscriptions is a terrible abuse of IMAP. Like most
terrible abuses, it's a-ok to choose for yourself if you're an
advanced user, but anyone who has done support for a broad user
bas
On Feb 24, 2010, at 2:08 PM, WJCarpenter wrote:
Example:
* I have 100's of sent-mail mailboxes I don't want to be
subscribed to, because it is doubtful I will ever use them. These
mailboxes are unsubscribed because I don't want to see them in any
mailbox listings by default.
This use
On 24.2.2010, at 22.08, WJCarpenter wrote:
>> This use of subscriptions is a terrible abuse of IMAP. Like most terrible
>> abuses, it's a-ok to choose for yourself if you're an advanced user, but
>> anyone who has done support for a broad user base knows that a client should
>> *NEVER* act like
Example:
* I have 100's of sent-mail mailboxes I don't want to be subscribed
to, because it is doubtful I will ever use them. These mailboxes are
unsubscribed because I don't want to see them in any mailbox listings
by default.
This use of subscriptions is a terrible abuse of IMAP. Like mos
On Feb 24, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Michael M. Slusarz wrote:
Quoting Jim Trigg :
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:37:52PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
2) Just implement IMAP protocol correctly and efficiently and
without
pointless settings, such as TB's "server supports folders that have
subfolders".
Quoting Jim Trigg :
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:37:52PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
2) Just implement IMAP protocol correctly and efficiently and without
pointless settings, such as TB's "server supports folders that have
subfolders". The HOWTO is mainly about this.
Like making "subscribed fo
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:37:52PM +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:18 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
> > I was wondering if you might take just a few minutes - no need to go
> > into great detail or anything unless you can do so off the top of your
> > head and don't mind - and
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Basically:
>
> 1) Online mode: Don't download all message headers at once at startup.
> If I open a mailbox, I'm seeing only about 20 messages on screen. That's
> all it needs to download. When I scroll the message list, download more
> as n
On 24/02/2010 18:37, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:18 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
I was wondering if you might take just a few minutes - no need to go
into great detail or anything unless you can do so off the top of your
head and don't mind - and outline what you see as the
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 13:18 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
> I was wondering if you might take just a few minutes - no need to go
> into great detail or anything unless you can do so off the top of your
> head and don't mind - and outline what you see as the biggest problems
> with all of these sucky
On 2010-02-18 10:50 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> I think they all suck. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I might
> try to continue http://trojita.flaska.net/. Its design looks good, but
> unfortunately it's nowhere near being actually usable and its
> development seems dead.
Hey Timo,
I wa
On Ter, 2010-02-23 at 14:23 +0100, Steffen Kaiser wrote:
>
> You mean like the c-client library of UW-Imap, the ultimate reference
> implementation of IMAP ;-)
>
> http://www.washington.edu/imap/
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UW_IMAP
>
> "The UW IMAP server is the reference server implement
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Toni Mueller wrote:
You all sound as if there should be an IMAP client library that does
IMAP right, and that all MUAs can make use of. Maybe someone can
intrigue some of the projects out there to collaborate.
You mean like th
Hi,
On Mon, 22.02.2010 at 11:04:23 +0300, Lev Serebryakov
wrote:
> because UI is terrible. For example, I don't lnow any client with
> proper, accurate text-only quoting (with '> ' marks). Some clients
> forget to spilt long lines, some don't add '> ' when I split quote
> line by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Lev,
On 2010-02-22 16:04, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
>> This is not a my-email-client-is-better-than-your-email-client thread,
>> I just want to know which client(s) make proper use of imap features
>> for fast searches/copies/deletions etc.
> IMHO, a
Hello, Axel.
You wrote 18 февраля 2010 г., 18:45:21:
> This is not a my-email-client-is-better-than-your-email-client thread,
> I just want to know which client(s) make proper use of imap features
> for fast searches/copies/deletions etc.
IMHO, all existing clients suck, but not only due to IMAP4
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 2010-02-18 23:50, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 17:45 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
>> Which modern email client under Linux is working best with dovecot? I
>> just did a grep on User-Agent:/X-Mailer: on my dovecot archive (which
>> g
Timo Sirainen wrote:
I think they all suck. If I ever have too much time on my hands, I might
try to continue http://trojita.flaska.net/. Its design looks good, but
unfortunately it's nowhere near being actually usable and its
development seems dead.
See http://projects.flaska.net/projects/act
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 17:45 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> Which modern email client under Linux is working best with dovecot? I
> just did a grep on User-Agent:/X-Mailer: on my dovecot archive (which
> goes back to 2004) and found that the top ten are:
>
> 28% Thunderbird
> 25% Evolution
> 9% Apple
Hi,
I'm a long term dovecot user, packager and believer, but on the other
side of the wire I've been a mutt user for longer than I can think.
Which modern email client under Linux is working best with dovecot? I
just did a grep on User-Agent:/X-Mailer: on my dovecot archive (which
goes back to 20
23 matches
Mail list logo
