Well, I don't know if it's called for, but I'm all in support for making IMAP work...however that's accomplished. I never got into the specifics of how it was implemented to understand how it ought/needs/might be changed.
Serge Knystautas Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites http://www.lokitech.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Yoost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 9:33 PM Subject: RE: IMAP Server Revisited is a vote called for? > So, Is a vote called for? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Serge Knystautas [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2001 9:12 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: IMAP Server Revisited > > > > I'm all for it. My help has been sporadic for the past year, and Charles > > similarly (Charles being the major author of the IMAP code). The IMAP > > code > > will make additional demands on the repositories, but I'd rather extend > > what > > we have than develop a separate set of repositories (I'd also like to see > > NNTP do the same, but don't have time and I can't even get the "main" > > repositories reliable :) > > > > Also I'm getting more determined to move the IMAP code to a proposal as > > it's > > not ready, it's not getting active development, and it's confusing about > > what features James currently offers. > > > > Ok, back to this pop3 repository problem... > > > > Serge Knystautas > > Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites > > http://www.lokitech.com/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "John Yoost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 4:05 PM > > Subject: IMAP Server Revisited > > > > > > > All, > > > > > > I have been looking at the existing IMAP Server code for some time now, > > and > > > also RFC2060. > > > > > > At the risk of pissing someone off, I propose the following: > > > > > > I have started to rewrite the IMAP server portion. > > > > > > I want to take a different approach than was taken in the past. > > > > > > I would like to include all the functionality up-to the point that I can > > > using the existing generic repository (file or DB). > > > > > > When I get to the point of adding functionality that is not currently > > > supported by the repository I will request (or add myself) this > > > functionality to the repository code. > > > > > > In this way functionality such as ACL mailboxes, could be added as > > people > > > using clients that use this extention need it. (maybe never :)) > > > > > > The current version of the IMAP server has a ton of code to support it's > > own > > > repository. > > > > > > > > > Comments, flames, or Agreement requested. > > > > > > -John Yoost --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
