On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 08:48:37AM +0000, J. Tull wrote: > ok, so this is one more reason to strenghten the base on which the sync > process runs. offlineimap should be inspired from rsync. It offers many > parameters that can be used as base for syncing process. > > I tried to look into the sources of offlineimap to add parameters such > as message-ID, Subject, dates, etc to add optionally as base for > syncing but i need some guidance to know which files should i look into > in priority.
I understand your POV. However, all of the historical/regular contributors to offlineimap and I know that the offlineimap code base is delicate. Please read these blog posts: - http://www.offlineimap.org/configuration/2016/01/29/why-i-m-not-using-maxconnctions.html - http://www.offlineimap.org/development/2015/04/04/planning-deep-refactoring.html - http://www.offlineimap.org/development/2015/10/08/imapfw-is-made-public.html offlineimap won't be updated to support Py3. We've tried. We've failed. More than once. offlineimap will die with the coming death of py2. Do you think this worth the efforts? I don't think so. I want to focus on imapfw ASAP (likely something like mid/end of 2019). -- Nicolas Sebrecht _______________________________________________ OfflineIMAP-project mailing list: [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/offlineimap-project OfflineIMAP homepages: - https://github.com/OfflineIMAP - http://offlineimap.org
