> Daniel Urstöger wrote: >> Talking about breaking the RFC, I wonder if I got this wrong or >> right: >> the plan is to put another interface to the database via the dbmail >> daemon, >> that would offer that as additional functionality, right? > > Well, 'plan' is somewhat optimistic. 'Design idea' would describe this > better since no-one has actually committed any resource to > implementing > this :-) > > But you got it right otherwise.
okay, well I have some spare time but I am not familiar with the 2.3 database scheme, I made a web interface for dbmail 2.2, which does management of the users, sub user, imap folders, etc. but not for 2.3 since I directly grab the email out from the database and not via IMAP... So ... I prolly would enjoy that but I guess first I have to have a decent look into the new scheme and also I am haven´t done any code changes on dbmail yet, so prolly that will just end in a mess ... > >> >> So actually inside the database the message will not get altered in >> any way, >> so I can see the message via dbmail-imap the normal way and if I >> connect >> through the user mapped ip/port the messages will be shown without >> attachments, >> but will include links to download those attachments? > > Usermapped ip/port or via a special 'virtual' username extension > '#mobile' or '#noattach' or whatever is decided on. Those are the kinds of changes I am quite sure you are the only one capable of doing that, right? ;) > >> >> I hope it got it right this way, as it seems a really nice solution, >> since it won´t >> break anything for the "normal" users and those who want mobile >> access >> can use that with the implecations.. > > correct. well, at least I understand the plan! _______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.fastxs.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
