Danny Angus ha scritto:
> On 06/11/2007, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> i think that this probably means that user information is going to
>> need to be passed in (if anyone can see good alternatives, please jump
>> in).
> 
> I don't think that it needs to be a problem, is there a use case of a
> mailbox without a user?
> 
> d.

I think that when you store a message into a mailbox (LocalDelivery) you
don't have a real user, unless we introduce a "Spooler" or "Remote" user
to be used in that use case (I don't like it too much).

The user is there only when you access the mailbox via an IMAP/POP3 client.

In POP3 there is no need to propagate the user to the backend because
the permissions are simple enough to be managed by the POP3 layer, but
if I understood it, in IMAP they preferred to manage permissions at the
mailboxmanager level.

Stefano


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to