On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 03:54:32PM +0200, Daniel Danner wrote: > On Sunday 28 May 2006 12:54, Daniel Danner wrote: > > In which way will these "flattened" folders be put into the slave? And wont > > everything get confused when I try to push the "flattened" folders to the > > server again? > > Well, allright. I already tried it out, and it looks like it just works fine. > > So could we say that this modification actually IS the support for > hierarchical syncing /in all it's glory/ -- but limited to mailboxes where a > dot is used as seperator. > heh, that's cheating. :) anyway, given that i'm not sure how many mailers would be able to deal with real hierarchical maildirs, andi think making this an option for regular use should be fine.
> Or are there still any traps to watch out for? > not sure. the major thing that stops me from just implementing it is the handling of INBOX. is INBOX.box also to be treated like INBOX, just with something appended? sounds reasonable - but mbsync will fall over it currently. have to read the RFC finally ... -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please! -- Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done. ------------------------------------------------------- All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk! Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ isync-devel mailing list isync-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/isync-devel
