[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again
From: |
chad |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again |
Date: |
Sat, 26 Oct 2013 22:18:41 -0700 |
On 26 Oct 2013, at 20:05, Lyndon Nerenberg <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Oct 26, 2013, at 7:11 PM, Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>> Beyond that, email messages are generally large (compared to calendar
>>> entries, anyway) collections of text. Changes to messages mostly involve
>>> small deltas to metadata.
>>
>> Note that messages in IMAP are immutable; we don't have to worry about
>> changes to a message.
>
> And thanks for quoting that previous text. I got a bit aggressive with the
> delete key and lost the message I was going to reply to :-P
I think that we've got some cross-talk going on here; and it's probably my
fault for jumping into a popular topic. I was suggesting looking at git and
notmuch for ideas and *perhaps* code for implementing something much farther
away from nmh 1.5 than 1.6 or 1.7. I'd hope that the user commands would be
compatible, but the internals (and especially the file-system layout) wouldn't
necessarily match at all. In that (highly theoretical) world, I explicitly
don't care that nmh relies on the filesystem structure in some places and not
others. For example, when I was talking about small deltas, I was imagining a
design where the metadata that nmh accesses through the filesystem, sequences
files, etc all move into the mail store - while remaining primarily plain text
in a filesystem (hence git).
In similar fashion, since I'm not talking about implementing an IMAP server
(did it once, mostly in perl: never again), I don't know why I'd care about the
server's restrictions on file storage. Perhaps you're thinking about building a
mail store that you share with an imap server? I dunno; I'm clearly not on the
same page. :-)
It's been a long time since I learned or implemented a network protocol from an
RPC, probably ~10 years. I'm not really qualified to debate whether or not MH
can be simplified enough to map directly to a plain IMAP server, but ~12 years
ago the answer really seemed to be `no'. At the same time, I make hourly use of
macosx's Mail.app, ios' mail app, google web interface, and a 3rd-party ios
mail client on 3+ devices across 7 imap accounts, 5 gmail and 2 others. It
works, mostly - well enough to get by, but not well enough that I don't miss MH.
Thanks for letting me ramble, and especially thanks for keeping MH alive!
~Chad
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Ken Hornstein, 2013/10/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/10/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Ken Hornstein, 2013/10/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, chad, 2013/10/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Ken Hornstein, 2013/10/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, chad, 2013/10/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/10/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, chad, 2013/10/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Ken Hornstein, 2013/10/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/10/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again,
chad <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, chad, 2013/10/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Valdis . Kletnieks, 2013/10/28
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Ken Hornstein, 2013/10/28
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/10/28
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Alexander Zangerl, 2013/10/28
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/10/28
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Joel Uckelman, 2013/10/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, chad, 2013/10/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Todd M. Kover, 2013/10/31
- Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2013/10/24