Re: [Cooker] Re: [CHRPM] imap-2002d-3mdk

[Luca Berra]

Giuseppe Ghib� wrote:
so if we want to be compatible we could
change the name to .mailboxlist
provide a default_mail_env like
mbox:%h/:INBOX=/var/spool/mail/%u:INDEX=%h/.imapidx
As I said for imap using mbox:%h/ as default is a bad, as it would have
Yes, the problem is that at the moment it is set-up this way, so 
changing it will break something.

The migration tools should be done using some simple script
...
IMHO they are quite easy/trivial to write.
this is also something that can easily screw user setup, so it should be 
done very carefully.
It also should deal with squirrel or similar and it is possible that 
someone changed the path on the client, so it may break things.

as I said if we would use the rule of using the same
Mailsubdir name either in dovecot and in imapd, we wouldn't even
need to move mailboxes, and also all the mail clients we have would
be happy in using an empty mailsubdir path.
this is the best option, i am uncertain as how it should be done.
this is why i proposed to keep things as they are and start bitching 
users to fix them manually.

IMHO, this "compatibity" to subscribed folders should be added by the 
dovecot author, using some switch in conf file (someone suggests him 
then), as it claim to be "fully compatible" with
i think it was discussed on the dovecot list, i'll check the archives

....
INBOX mailbox(es) could also be accessed at the same time in POP3/POP3s 
mode...
I thought that the dovecot pop server would deal with indexes

...

migration path from uw. This is why i proposed dovecot, it should
receive broad testing to see if it is a viable solution for replacing
uw, but i don't see it easy for 9.2.
Another alternative would be also to include the "maildir" patch
for uw-imapd.
a patch that mark crispin does not want to accept in uw.

BTW, Have you tried bincimap?
no. i found dovecot because i was looking for an alternative to uw which 
did not force me to change the mailbox format (too many users on that 
system and i did not get paid for the work)

btw speaking of cyrus, what about putting the dirsync patch in the
kernel?
That's for Juan.

well, Juan what do you think about it?

i have a dirsync patch running on my main mail server with no ill effect.

regards,
L.