On 8 Mar 2003, Timo Sirainen wrote: >On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 14:52, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote: >> (Maildir and IMAP are not ideally suited to each other. For details, see >> <http://www.washington.edu/imap/IMAP-FAQs/index.html#6.9>) >I know of only two problems with it: >1. RENAME INBOX can't be made atomic with Courier-style directory >structure >2. There's a small possibility of temporarily losing mails if it's flags >keep changing (ie. the filename changes) while the directory is being >scanned. Although this also depends on how filesystem's readdir() >handles renames. >I think that FAQ entry is mostly about why UW-IMAP doesn't support >Maildir.
http://cr.yp.to/proto/maildir.html "Why should I use maildir? Two words: no locks." I may well be wrong, but I haven't found a way to implement IMAP over Maildir without locking the depository during a scan. In that sense, I agree that Maildir is not suited for IMAP (or the other way around). No mailbox format that I have found is well suited for IMAP in that sense. Andy -- Andreas Aardal Hanssen
