So sprach Not Zed am 2002-06-13 um 21:50:06 +0930 : > them away and rely on the summary content, or store them some other, > more efficient way (like a null mbox).
Hm, wouldn't a null "Maildir" be even more efficient (at least on some filesystems - but then again, mbox is not always faster as a Maildir). > There are also some overheads in evolution not related to imap at all, > but the displaying of the list of messages, which start to impact more > once you get above a few thousand messages. We're looking at addressing > these issues too, but they probably dont rate very highly in your > timings anyway. Yes, that's right. After Evo has finished loading the folder, there's a short delay. But taken the other huge delays, I don't care much at all about this delay. > mailing list' continues to work usefully, its still not going to be as > fast as mutt, although it should be faster than currently. Well, if you could get it to be at least as fast as Mozilla is (in terms of reading a folder), then it would be good. > Might have to make it an option so users can decide what is more > important to them - speed or features. Yes, that's very important. The way it is now, Evo just isn't usable for me over IMAP :( Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die g�nstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 3 hours 37 minutes _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
