On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 03:13:37PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote:
> Mail used to come from servers to clients via POP. It was
> essentially a full-push of a mailbox. Bidirectional sync was
> not a good idea.

> IMAP is, explicitly, a mail protocol for clients to do the
> minimal amount of fetching necessary. You can do a full sync on
> top of it, but that's not what it's there for.

A lot has changed since then. I remember I used to pop everything
because the mailserver quota was less than 10mb (20 years back). And
then take backup of local emails on floppy drives.

Now we check emails on mobiles, browser and obviously *mutt*. There must
be some inclusive intuitive changes now.

> Mutt implements both POP and IMAP, and doesn't implement
> sync-everything-over-IMAP. There are tools for that, and if you
> want them, it's reasonable to point you at the specialist tools
> and say, look: they do their jobs well.

Honestly speaking, I have tried a couple of tools - offlineimap, mbsync
and fetchmail. All are flawed. That is what lead me to start this thread
in the first place. 'mutt' has a clean implementation. And it implements
protocols very well. If there is a simple configuration option to manage
this that would be great. I may start it's implementation after a
philosophical debate here.

set imap_prefetch = yes/no

This could be a good idea to completely do away with other tools which
are no longer maintained. 

> If you want to add full IMAP mailbox syncing to mutt, you will
> need to either do it well enough that people agree it's better
> than the existing tools, or convince somebody else to do it in
> a way that is that much better.
I completely agree on this.

Planet Earth. 

The light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an approaching train.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to