> Joel Reicher wrote:
>
> > You *can* have imapd run on the same server as the homedirs are. What
> > you can't (or shouldn't) do is leave open any kind of access to the
> > mailstore because there's no guarantee that a random app the user decides
> > to use won't corrupt the folders by accessing them as local files.
>
> But that then is their fault.
IMHO it's not that simple; users must take responsibility for some
things, certainly, but sysadmins decide the extent of it. For example
you wouldn't make the raw disk device publicly writable and then blame
users for file system corruption; maintaining file system integrity is not
their job. Similarly you wouldn't give users access to raw database
storage becuase they may corrupt the storage mechanism. This is also how
I think about mailstores; the storage mechanism should be sysadmin
controlled so you can choose whether you want, e.g. mix or mbx, because
that will make a difference to backups and server load. But to do that
you need to control the file access and force users to access mailstore
contents through drivers of your choosing.
With mailstores the problem of storage integrity gets interesting as a
result of asynchronous delivery, e.g. the bad old days of NFS mounted
maildrops. It's not something users should have to deal with, I think.
Cheers,
- Joel
_______________________________________________
Imap-uw mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
