Re: [Nmh-workers] Future directions for nmh

[Lyndon Nerenberg]

> On Mar 16, 2016, at 4:56 PM, Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> And I believe
> it makes it WORSE; each nmh command starts with a brand-new scan of a
> folder, so messages added or removed between commands work out fine.
> But a FUSE interface would have no idea when an nmh command is starting
> or stopping, so you'd have to do a lot of caching or a new IMAP session
> for each file access.

That pretty much nuts down the issue.  If you want to play IMAP in MH, you must 
become a full-on IMAP client, playing all those locking games.