[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] MH + IMAP? (was Large MH directories
From: |
Ken Hornstein |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] MH + IMAP? (was Large MH directories |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Oct 2017 20:16:54 -0400 |
>Given all this it makes sense to me to start with the model of
>of a separate daemon. I think interfacing nmh commands with mhd
>will be much simpler than interfacing with a remote imap server.
Personally, I am not convinced this is true. But, please don't let my
concerns stop you! Really, I think at this point any IMAP is better
than no IMAP. The only thing I ask is that you please use the "netsec"
layer for IMAP network communication; I did all of the hard work of
doing the right security stuff in there, and I'd hate to see that work
duplicated.
>Yes. Any command that can add/delete/move folders and messsages
>will have to talk to mhd. But pick, show, scan don't need to.`
I ... do not believe that is true. Or I am not understanding your
architecture.
>At a minimum I want inc working!
I've thought about this carefully, and I believe that in an IMAP world
you would not use "inc". Or at least you wouldn't use it very often
in the normal case. You might be thinking of "refile".
--Ken
Re: [Nmh-workers] MH + IMAP? (was Large MH directories, Ralph Corderoy, 2017/10/15