On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 12:00, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote: > On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Toby Betts wrote: > >The part that acknowledges Maildir usually wins. The reason that Binc is > >so wonderful is due in part because of this: Binc doesn't corrupt mail. > >Adding other storage formats is going to break something, somewhere, and > >Binc is going to get the blame. > > What you are saying is very true. I agree completely. > > At the same time, Binc IMAP has one property that no other IMAP server > has, and that is towards developers out there that need IMAP access to > arbitrary backends, be it sql servers, ldap (God forbid) databases or > wierd ssh-over-imap backends. For these developers, Binc IMAP will be the > server that they can download, unpack, understand, and then incorporate > into their systems. Other servers aren't even close to this. > > This is why there has been laid down so much work on creating a good API > towards the backend. Binc IMAP can support several backends, and they can > even coexist inside the same depot. > > Whether mbox support is implemented directly in Binc IMAP or not, that is > for the community (you!) to decide.
well, as a long time listener, first time user (heh), I would say no to mbox. Or at least no until whenever, I'm sure there are features in binc that are lacking, or whatever :) There's always something else to do besides write mbox support ;) -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kitchen @ #qmail on EFNet - Join the party! ..................... Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. www.inter7.com 866.528.3530 toll free 847.492.0470 int'l 847.492.0632 fax GNUPG key ID: 93BDD6CE
