On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Caskey Dickson wrote: >Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote: >> Because of Binc's current behavior, we would always have to allow a select >> on INBOX.a to translate into a select on "a". >I think this is bad. A select on "INBOX.a" should be a select on "INBOX.a". >A select on "a" should be a select on "a".
Currently, if you select INBOX, you're actually selecting what is set to be the default mailbox path relative to your user's homedir, such as ~user/Maildir/ Selecting INBOX.a means selecting ~user/Maildir/.a/ Some users find it unnatural that all folders must be created as subfolders of INBOX, even though it's perfectly logical why it's like that from a technical point of view. If we are to allow creating folders on the root level, next to inbox, we may do the following. Selecting INBOX will be the same as before, but selecting a folder called "a" will select ~user/Maildir/.a/ Similarily, creating "foo" will give ~user/Maildir/.foo/ Since we can not tell wether the user meant that Maildir/.foo/ should be interpreted as INBOX.foo or simply as foo, we need to choose one. I would like the choice to be that "foo" implies ~user/Maildir/.foo. Creating folders as subfolders of INBOX has no technically simple solution if we follow the '.' convention. I'm not able at this time to say wether this is the only standard way to represent folders in Maildir. For clients that use the current policy of subfolders-under-INBOX, they must still be allowed to select their old INBOX.a folders, but they are no longer allowed to create new ones there. If they reset their subscription list, they will see that their old "INBOX.Sent_Mail.2002.Feb.23" folder is now called "Sent_Mail.2002.Feb.23", that is - on the root level, not under INBOX. But I see what you mean - that we could allow both. The question is - can we allow both in such a way that any Maildir client (not necessarily Binc IMAP client) would understand the Maildir structure? >> users to a format where no subfolders are allowed under INBOX unless they >> are there "already". >Is there a reason to prevent folders under INBOX? The standard doesn't seem >to limit such things. If so, why? If not, then I say leave them. The reason for preventing this is that many users find it logical to create folders next to INBOX and not inside INBOX. I think it's ok to create them inside INBOX (heck, anywhere!) but many don't. >I suppose my question is this: Is bincimap currently translating selects on >"a" to "INBOX.a"? If so, this behavior should be deprecated. If not, then No, it is not. Selecting "a" today is not allowed. >simply allowing a means to create and maintain root folders--and designating >them, perhaps without a leading '.' would be the best solution. Subfolders of >Maildir/ that are detected as Maildirs are offered up as either subfolders of >INBOX if the beign with '.' or as their own top-level folders if they do not. I see your point. We could allow both root level folders and INBOX subfolders. I'll have to investigate the Maildir subfolder extensions to see if this is allowed. >As a side note, I think a solution for root folders that uses a directory >other than Maildir/ is a bad idea. Some of us operate mail systems where the >only user specific directory is their Maildir/, they don't have a 'home' >directory as they are not actual users on the system. (Obviously their >Maildir/ is not named Maildir/) In this case, let the authenticator return the full path, and set the mailbox path in the Binc config to "", the empty string, and report it as a bug if it doesn't work. :-) Andy -- Andreas Aardal Hanssen | http://www.andreas.hanssen.name/gpg Author of Binc IMAP | Nil desperandum
