Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Wietse Venema
Wietse Venema: > Charles: > > So, my question is, why can't the option that I described enable a > > feature similar to the existing BCC feature, > > Appending mail to a NAMED FOLDER such as +Sent is NOT similar to > the delivery of BCC mail. > > BCC email is delivered via the LMTP or equivalent

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Wietse Venema
Charles: > So, my question is, why can't the option that I described enable a > feature similar to the existing BCC feature, Appending mail to a NAMED FOLDER such as +Sent is NOT similar to the delivery of BCC mail. BCC email is delivered via the LMTP or equivalent interface which does not suppo

Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Denis Witt
On 26.06.2012 09:02, J. Bakshi wrote: The concept is; Whatever developer1,2,3 send to client1,2,3 or receive from them will be stored in a separate mailbox which will be accessible from the both end to see all the communication. Furthermore there will be a filter which can filter all communica

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Charles Marcus
On 2012-06-26 8:21 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: Many of today's IMAP servers don't store email under /var/spool/mail in files that are owned by the individual user's UNIX system account. I guess maybe this is one of those 'lost in translation' issues. Currently, if postfix receives an email that

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Wietse Venema
Charles Marcus: > All that would be required is for postfix to have the ability to save > emails directly to the mail store Sorry, that hasn't been an option for the last 15 years or so. Many of today's IMAP servers don't store email under /var/spool/mail in files that are owned by the individu

Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 26.06.2012 13:23, schrieb J. Bakshi: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:21:00 +0200 > Reindl Harald wrote: > > [..] >> >> remember that postfix is even not responsible for your sent-folder >> on a IMAP-server because these messages are stored there by your >> mail-client after send over SMTP w

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Charles Marcus
On 2012-06-26 7:12 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: Charles Marcus: it sure would be nice if we could do away with the need to have the client send the message over the wire *twice*, once to the smtp server for outbound delivery, then again to the IMAP server for saving the Sent copy, when the mail sto

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 26.06.2012 13:22, schrieb Patrick Ben Koetter: >>> smtpd_save_to_sent_folder = Sent >> >> I suppose this hypothetical feature would come with a little IMAP >> client, configuration parameters that specify the IMAP server address >> and port, IMAP server credentials, and so on. > > In the hypo

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Dennis Guhl
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 01:13:32PM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 26.06.2012 12:59, schrieb Charles Marcus: [..] > > Yes, but it sure would be nice if we could do away with the need > > to have the client send the message over the wire *twice*, once to > > the smtp server for outbound del

Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread J. Bakshi
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:21:00 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote: [..] > > remember that postfix is even not responsible for your sent-folder > on a IMAP-server because these messages are stored there by your > mail-client after send over SMTP was successful > [..] But what about the incomin

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Patrick Ben Koetter
* Wietse Venema : > Charles Marcus: > > On 2012-06-26 6:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > remember that postfix is even not responsible for your sent-folder > > > on a IMAP-server because these messages are stored there by your > > > mail-client after send over SMTP was successful > > > > Yes, bu

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 26.06.2012 12:59, schrieb Charles Marcus: > On 2012-06-26 6:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >> remember that postfix is even not responsible for your sent-folder >> on a IMAP-server because these messages are stored there by your >> mail-client after send over SMTP was successful > > Yes, but it

Re: OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Wietse Venema
Charles Marcus: > On 2012-06-26 6:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: > > remember that postfix is even not responsible for your sent-folder > > on a IMAP-server because these messages are stored there by your > > mail-client after send over SMTP was successful > > Yes, but it sure would be nice if we co

OT - was Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Charles Marcus
On 2012-06-26 6:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: remember that postfix is even not responsible for your sent-folder on a IMAP-server because these messages are stored there by your mail-client after send over SMTP was successful Yes, but it sure would be nice if we could do away with the need to ha

Re: common mailbox for design

2012-06-26 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 26.06.2012 09:02, schrieb J. Bakshi: > Dear list, > > I need your suggestion to design a common organizational mailbox. > > The concept is; Whatever developer1,2,3 send to client1,2,3 or receive from > them > will be stored in a separate mailbox which will be accessible from the both > end