On 12/16/2009 02:50 PM, Milan Crha wrote: > On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 17:34 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > >> Btw, just don't remember well, but Milan did a research of the same, >> moving from mbox to maildir. Milan do you remember the points to >> consider? It will be helpful >> > Hi, > I'm sorry, I forgot those, it's quite long time ago. Some of them were > mentioned in this thread, like: > - cannot use ':' in a file name for Windows > - cannot create a subfolder of an Inbox >
The standard way to nest Maildir folders is such: Maildir/ cur/ new/ tmp/ .GNOME/ cur/ new/ tmp/ .GNOME.Evolution/ cur/ new/ tmp/ .GNOME.Evolution.Hackers/ cur/ new/ tmp/ .Xorg/ cur/ new/ tmp/ this will give you the following folder tree: Inbox GNOME Evolution Hackers Xorg > - cannot use folder names 'new'/'cur'/'tmp' as those are maildir's > see above. > - should choose folder hierarchy model (there is some already, but it > has some issue, but I'm not sure what it is) > see above. > - recently also some slowness for refresh of large folders (should be > partially fixed, but not fully, if I recall correctly) > is this related to readdir() performance? > I've a feeling there were more, but I forgot them. :( > > As others in this thread I would also prefer to use maildir instead of > creating new provider for this. The maildir would be fixed and changed > slightly to satisfy evo needs for those above issues, but otherwise > there's no difference for mbox-per-file, as maildir does pretty the same > thing (message-per-file). > I agree. Jeff _______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers