Dear all,
As this is the LibreOffice user mailing list would you be kind enough to take
this discussion elsewhere, for instance the Thunderbird mailing list?
Thanks,
Charles.
--
Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+uns
On 3/3/2016 2:44 PM, Felmon Davis wrote:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
My experience with IMAP through a browser is helping friends install
Thunderbird, friends who have had there account taken over in AOL, MS
Mail and YaHoo.
When I install Thunderbird, I suggest to them that i
On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 3/3/2016 10:18 AM, Davis, Felmon wrote:
On Mar 3, 2016 7:19 AM, "James Knott" wrote:
You should be able to configure your IMAP client to download messages
for "offline" mode. There is also an archive function.
yeah, like I said, got to do my resear
On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
My experience with IMAP through a browser is helping friends install
Thunderbird, friends who have had there account taken over in AOL, MS Mail
and YaHoo.
When I install Thunderbird, I suggest to them that it does not require using
a browser, greatly
PLONK
On 3/3/2016 1:12 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> Thank you taking the time to repeatedly note the level of my intelligence.
>
> Regretfully, It has not resulted in any clear and/or concise explanations.
>
> No why, no when and no how.
>
> My apologies to others on this list.
> Paul
--
T
Thank you taking the time to repeatedly note the level of my intelligence.
Regretfully, It has not resulted in any clear and/or concise explanations.
No why, no when and no how.
My apologies to others on this list.
Paul
On 3/3/2016 12:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
Will never, ever happen, because i
Will never, ever happen, because it is a STUPID IDEA.
Sorry, been trying to not be so rude, but, well, sometimes there is no
other way.
OF course, I am wrong - there is one way something like that might
actually ever be attempted - if you write it yourself.
I'd say good luck, but it isn't a fact
Edit
2. Have Thunderbird POP installed on multiple devices that align
themselves to e-mail address(es) securely without the interaction of
a server except for PGP and message store and forward.
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www
On 3/3/2016 12:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> 1. Make secured e-mails without trusting the the server. Security ends
> where trust starts.
So, learn how to use encryption (PGP) end to end. That is the only way
to ensure secure email.
The problem you'll have is getting the people you corre
My experience with IMAP through a browser is helping friends install
Thunderbird, friends who have had there account taken over in AOL, MS
Mail and YaHoo.
When I install Thunderbird, I suggest to them that it does not require
using a browser, greatly reducing the chance of being tripped up on
On 3/3/2016 10:18 AM, Davis, Felmon wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2016 7:19 AM, "James Knott" wrote:
>> You should be able to configure your IMAP client to download messages
>> for "offline" mode. There is also an archive function.
> yeah, like I said, got to do my research again. at the time I was wrestl
On Mar 3, 2016 7:19 AM, "James Knott" wrote:
>
> On 03/03/2016 04:09 AM, Felmon Davis wrote:
> > I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my machines
> > albeit not currently in use) but mainly I'm on IMAP. what I liked
> > about POP was the ease of making local backups of email. it
On 03/03/2016 04:09 AM, Felmon Davis wrote:
> I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my machines
> albeit not currently in use) but mainly I'm on IMAP. what I liked
> about POP was the ease of making local backups of email. it's been a
> couple of yrs since I've explored options in
Paul,
for the benefit of us lurkers trying to follow this discussion, could
you in a brief statement explain why you think POP should be
preferred? (I believe this is your general point? if not, a clear
statement is welcome.)
I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my machine
On 03/02/2016 05:57 PM, toki wrote:
>> Also, if you're leaving email on a POP server for a period of time,
> it's going to be there when someone comes looking for it.
>
> That is not the threat model I was addressing.
Then what was it?
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libre
On 02/03/2016 22:26, James Knott wrote:
>Also, if you're leaving email on a POP server for a period of time,
it's going to be there when someone comes looking for it.
That is not the threat model I was addressing.
jonathon
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org
P
On 03/02/2016 05:08 PM, toki wrote:
> If, as is usually done with IMAP, the email is stored on a server that
> is neither owned, nor operated, nor controlled by the recipient of the
> email, then the security issue is the IMAP vendor turning that email
> over to third parties without your knowledge
On 02/03/2016 21:40, James Knott wrote:
> Also, how is IMAP a security problem,
If, as is usually done with IMAP, the email is stored on a server that
is neither owned, nor operated, nor controlled by the recipient of the
email, then the security issue is the IMAP vendor turning that email
over t
On 03/02/2016 03:46 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> Thunderbird is a database of information. The fact that there is no
> data replication built in is not the inhibiting factor to doing so.
It is an email client, nothing more. If you want replication, you're
going to need some means for all client
On 03/02/2016 12:06 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack surface area. YaHoo,
>> > should I say more.
> No, you really shouldn't, because you obviously don't know what you're
> talking about.
>
> The only thing IMAP *might* have in common with Yahoo is that Yah
On 03/02/2016 11:32 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> IMAP is a pre-existing condition.
>
> The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients
> current is a glaring omission that should be rectified.
> I regret not having the ability to do this myself.
I guess you don't know much about t
On 3/2/2016 4:00 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> On 3/2/2016 2:17 PM, toki wrote:
>> Can you please rephrase that.
>> If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both the POP and
>> IMAP protocol specifications, before making any suggestions as to what
>> should be considered for either
On 3/2/2016 2:17 PM, toki wrote:
On 02/03/2016 16:32, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a
glaring omission that should be rectified.
Can you please rephrase that.
If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both th
What relates
Thunderbird is a database of information. The fact that there is no
data replication built in is not the inhibiting factor to doing so.
I have underlined the pertinent words from a quoted definition from the
previously mentioned URL.
http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/de
Neither of which relate to serverless mail synchronization of local mail
stores.
On 3/2/2016 1:17 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> Ok, I don't know what Data Replication is.
> Please see
> http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/definition/database-replication
>
> I don't know what Key Exchange is.
On 02/03/2016 16:32, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a
> glaring omission that should be rectified.
Can you please rephrase that.
If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both the POP and
IMAP protocol specificat
Ok, I don't know what Data Replication is.
Please see
http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/definition/database-replication
I don't know what Key Exchange is.
Please see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U62S8SchxX4
But I think somebody does.
On 3/2/2016 12:06 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 3/2/2016
On 3/2/2016 11:32 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> We're talking POP and Thunderbird.
And like I said, POP simply isn't designed for such usage.
> IMAP is a pre-existing condition.
No idea what you mean by that.
> The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current
> is a gla
We're talking POP and Thunderbird.
IMAP is a pre-existing condition.
The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current
is a glaring omission that should be rectified.
I regret not having the ability to do this myself.
IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack sur
Oh - not to mention that it doesn't even accomplish the goal.
What about all of the email prior to adding 'Thunderbird 3' to the mix?
Or your new phone?
As I said, IMAP is the only sane, rational solution.
On 2/29/2016 10:23 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
> Possible? Sure, anything is possible, but this
Possible? Sure, anything is possible, but this is way too breakable to
even give serious consideration to.
On 2/29/2016 3:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> Each e-mail address has its own "STATUS" file.
> "STATUS" file e-mails are not deletable from the POP mail server unless
> specifically comma
Each e-mail address has its own "STATUS" file.
"STATUS" file e-mails are not deletable from the POP mail server unless
specifically commanded to delete them within Thunderbird via a separate
command
or when all "STATUS" files are duplicated based on time stamp.
"STATUS" files are based
On 2/29/2016 12:57 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> While I do plead ignorance about mail servers, software resident on the
> users machine can do what it wants.
To a point, yes...
> Since PGP already exists in Thunderbird, a server is not required for
> updating.
What pray tell does PGP have to
On 2/29/2016 11:33 AM, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2/29/2016 11:04 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
On 2/27/2016 5:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
Lotus SmartSuite was am integrated mail server/groupware solution.
You're comparing apples and oranges.
You are correct again. But the question is, how can we put
On 2/29/2016 11:04 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> On 2/27/2016 5:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> Lotus SmartSuite was am integrated mail server/groupware solution.
>>
>> You're comparing apples and oranges.
> You are correct again. But the question is, how can we put the apple
> and the orange togeth
On 2/27/2016 5:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2/27/2016 2:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
One of the things I miss about Lotus SmartSuite is its' TeamMail function.
A quick google suggests this is nothing more than Shared Mailbox
functionality. That is Server functionality, TB is a mail client.
Y
On 2/27/2016 2:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
> One of the things I miss about Lotus SmartSuite is its' TeamMail function.
A quick google suggests this is nothing more than Shared Mailbox
functionality. That is Server functionality, TB is a mail client.
> It also included Team Review, Team Conso
One of the things I miss about Lotus SmartSuite is its' TeamMail function.
It also included Team Review, Team Consolidate and Team Security.
It might be old school, but it worked.
If Thunderbird could function within LibreOffice in a similar way, it
would be a great addition.
Support for Sma
On 2/27/2016 7:06 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
> Reliability aside (I really don't trust OL and I've got lot of backing
> experience to support that), I've yet to find a feature in OL that TB is
> missing (apart integration with Exchange).
Actually, Outlook was designed first and foremost as an
On 2/26/2016 8:49 PM, toki wrote:
> From my POV, for TDF to write a new email client would be a waste of
> effort.
+1
> A couple of issues with TDF adoption of Thunderbird are:
>
> * What will TDF policy on breaking extensions be?
> I have no idea if it was TB, or the extensions that were upgra
On 02/27/16 02:49, toki wrote:
^2: I don't use Outlook, so I have no idea what features Outlook
currently offers --- other than reliable retrieving email under all
conditions --- that Thunderbird does not currently support;
Reliability aside (I really don't trust OL and I've got lot of backing
On 26/02/2016 23:30, Tim Lloyd wrote:
> * 2 sets of developers - that should be fun :)
It would be no more complicated that the Apache Software Foundation, or,
for that matter, The Mozilla Foundation.
> * Does TDF actually want to do this?
Pretty much since OOo dropped (^1) the built-in email
Hi Tom,
from a user perspective, a great idea. Hpwever:
* 2 sets of developers - that should be fun :)
* Does TDF actually want to do this? Cue howls from sections of the
open source community if the answer is yes
* Is there any value in TDF writing its own mail client?
It is good to get
I'd be fully supportive of bringing Thunderbird into the LO family. I've
been a user of both for years and am very concerned about Thunderbird's
future. The only Microsoft software I'm willing to actually spend money
on is Windows, and I wouldn't even do that if there were a Linux version
of m
Tom Davies wrote:
As most of you know - many organisations, particularly OpenSource ones,
have departments/sections/sub-groups that focus on supporting external
projects that are used within their own project. For example Ubuntu,
Redhat, openSuSE, Mageia, Fedora (and so on) each have people able
hi.
i am realy advocate of opensource project and become happy to know
about them and help people.
its a good idea, but i am not expert in using thunderbird and dont
have information about it.
thank you tom.
On 2/26/16, Tanstaafl wrote:
> No, no, no. There is no reason.
>
> Or, at the very least,
No, no, no. There is no reason.
Or, at the very least, it is wy too early to even consider
*thinking about* a name change for Thunderbird.
Personally, I wouldn't necessarily be against it, but there would have
to be a decent successful history of Thunderbird development under TDF
umbr
May should be renamed to LibreOffice Mail.
El feb. 26, 2016 9:04 AM, "Tanstaafl" escribió:
> I think bringing Thunderbird fully under the umbrella of The Document
> Foundation, and as a sister project of LibreOffice, is a fantastic idea,
> it just makes the most sense to me as a formal and perman
I think bringing Thunderbird fully under the umbrella of The Document
Foundation, and as a sister project of LibreOffice, is a fantastic idea,
it just makes the most sense to me as a formal and permanent home for
Thunderbird going forward.
The fact is, in spite of the fact that Thunderbird develop
Hi :)
How do people here feel about approaching the Thunderbird people to bring
them into the LibreOffice project a bit more? Perhaps they could become
the official default email client?
As most of you know - many organisations, particularly OpenSource ones,
have departments/sections/sub-groups t
50 matches
Mail list logo