On 21 Feb 2003, Jonas Pasche wrote: >Hi Charlie, >> > If .INBOX exists and is a Maildir, then we rename it to an >> > appropriate replacement name, such as .INBOX-Renamed, .INBOX-Renamed-<n> >> > where n increases. >> Why would you do this? So that someone can switch from bincimap to >> courier, to binc, to courier, etc? Is it important to support that? >As I'm in the process of having both servers running on two different >IPs on the same machine, it's kinda important to be able to have >consistent IMAP access, meaning, I'd like to see exactly the same folder >structure.
Very important point. But still - Binc is a young project, and is still in Beta mode, which means that we can make changes that affect existing users. I wouldn't want everything to break, but some things might happen. For instance, if we were to rename submailboxes called INBOX, then that may affect approximately 0% of our users at this point. Later on, it may become a bigger problem. >As I think that many people are willing to switch to Binc IMAP, I guess >it will be a major problem if they have to rearrange their INBOXes or >finding it suddenly as a renamed folder when switching back. >For example, I use Evolution under Linux as my mail client, with no >manual namespace settings. Using Courier-IMAP, INBOX is a folder between >all other folders. Using Binc IMAP, INBOX is a root folder which >contains every other folder (and it doesn't make too much sense to have >the "Sent" box as a subfolder of "INBOX" - that's like the good old >"Click on <Start> to shutdown the machine"). ;) Evolution 1.0.8-1 uses the NAMESPACE extension of Courier-IMAP to provide this interface for the user. Evolution 1.2.2 does _not_ do this, and shows the structure as subfolders of INBOX again. Anyway it does not show submailboxes under INBOX, but we may be able to support both. >Having the folder structure rearranged implies that filter rules on the >client side that put a mail into a specified folder will break when >switching the IMAP server - the folders still exist, but not at the same >hierarchy. >I'm no IMAP expert, but I already see that this namespace thing is >somewhere between "irritating for the average user" and "bloody crap" :) Well the NAMESPACE extension is what gives you what you see in Evolution with Courier-IMAP. I guess you mean the manual namespace settings that many clients allow. Yes, I agree that we should by default have a structure that is acceptable for all. Andy -- Andreas Aardal Hanssen | http://www.andreas.hanssen.name/gpg Author of Binc IMAP | Nil desperandum
