In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, also sprach clemensF:
>> John Reinhagen:
>
>> Storing IMAP sequences in one's local filesystem, as Jerry Peek appears to
>> be suggesting, is another approach, but it has problems. There are some
>> trivial annoyances -- IMAP folders can't have the same name as local
>> folders, for example. However, there's a more fundamental bug: The entire
>> advantage of IMAP lies in storing parts of one's email environment -- unseen
>> messages, etc. -- on a central server that one can access from anywhere.
>> Storing sequences on local filesystems violates that idea to the extent that
>> people consider sequences to be a part of their email environment. I submit
>> that people would so consider.
>
>the error of which would be that local sequences can get out of sync when
>files are chenged on the imap-server or even on the local server.
IMAP tags follow individual messages, so yeah, the tags would follow the
messages on the IMAP server. Or was this what you meant?
>there's no valid reverse mapping from sequences back to imap-folder-contents,
>because imap has no sequences, and if it had, it does not belong to
>nmh. it's more like the other way around.
I wouldn't suggest implementing sequences through imap-folder-contents.
JCR
--
Observed by Jeff Cooper:
"Headline in the _Arizona Republic_:
247 POUNDS OF COCAINE SEIZED: TWO HELD
(Cheap! Ten percent is little enough.)"
