Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
(Caskey Dickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>):
issues with Mutt, but frankly I'm not very interested in bending
any server in the interest of a single application.  Especially one
which is perfectly capable of functioning with the structures as-is.
I don't care about one application either: I care about violating
a basic decades-old useful convention of the Unix operating system:
Didn't you just tell me that "Too much /really bad/ software has been created by praying to the false God of backward compatibility..."? :-)

that files and folders beginning with "." are hidden.  All the GUI
file manager tools, for example, have to be told specifically to
show such files, and when you use that setting, they also show you
the 400 configuration files you really wanted hidden.  It's a simple
matter of playing by the rules: if you make useful files, give them
useful names.  If they /should/ be hidden files, use a dot.  I can't
think of anything that /shouldn't/ be hidden more than a mailbox.
This again falls in the realm of an application that is interpreting Binc's structures in a manner inconsistent with how Binc interprets them. If your tool can't easily switch between one view and another, then your tool is broken, not BincIMAP.

I don't care what BINC uses as its separator; I don't really care
about the on-disk representation is for its folders.  For all I care,
it could map folder "Foo" to "~/SesameStreet/FooMonster".  I /do/
care that it is useful with IMAP tools such as MUAs (and for that
reason it should be flexible in allowing folder names with CREATE
and LIST),
I believe it is flexible in allowing folder names with CREATE and LIST, once the problem with root folders is addressed, maybe all your concerns will have been addressed?

and I care that it doesn't do terribly incovenient things
to my home directory, like putting my mail in folders I can't find
when I do a text search or something.
If your text search tool won't look in directories named '.*', then I would consider that application to be broken and in need of replacing. It most certainly is not of interest to the design and implementation of an IMAP server. That, however, is neither here nor there.

> If it means breaking
compatibility to fix what I consider an obvious bug, then sobeit.
This is the heart of our difference of opinion, you consider it to be a bug to prepend folders with '.', I don't. I encourage you to write a patch that makes the path separator configurable. I find the current behavior to be not only acceptable, but a good idea that promotes adoption by other administrators. If it were modifiable, that would be even better, but I would rather time be spent on furthering Binc's IMAP conformance than accomodating other software's interpretation of reality.

C=)

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better the hard truth than the comforting fantasy. -- Carl Sagan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caskey <caskey*technocage.com> /// TechnoCage Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
A presumption on your part does not constitute an obligation on my part.



Reply via email to