oh yea, and threading... because ENVELOPE only gets you the In-Reply-To value, not the References values.
Jeff On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 13:16 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 10:41 -0400, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > I can't comment on Pine, but I find TBird's IMAP a lot faster than > > Evo's. Also more reliable (I've *never* had TBird hang on me). Given > > recent comments about rewriting the IMAP code, is no-one thinking of > > just adapting it from some other client (TBird, Pine, ...)? I mean, > > isn't that what free software is all about? > > rarely can one *ever* adapt code from one project into another because > they use different abstractions, etc. Evolution also has features the > others do not. > > When I rewrote IMAP for Evo last year (which only supported the small > subset of features the moz-mail, etc supported), it was blazingly fast > until I had to go and add back all the feature-bloat that users demanded > that had been included in previous versions of Evolution. > > A huge slowness for Evo IMAP is the fact that it has to ask for > whole-headers in order to support vfoldering on mailing-lists, > attachment icons in the message-list, etc. > > If you eliminate the need to FETCH BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ...], and > instead can settle on just ENVELOPE, things are MUCH faster. > > Jeff > > > > > poc > > > > On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 22:28 +0800, Murray Trainer wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I saw the comment about Evolution's IMAP performance in this recent > > > thread on the Cyrus list and thought it might be of interest here. > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Murray > > > > > > -----Forwarded Message----- > > > From: Marco Colombo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: Andreas Hasenack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: Tunning for large number of files in INBOX > > > Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 15:54:16 +0200 > > > > > > On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 13:22 -0300, Andreas Hasenack wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 02:56:58PM -0600, Michael Loftis wrote: > > > > > clients retrofitted to squak IMAP. Get a real IMAP client like > > > > > Mulberry > > > > > that takes advantage of server side sorting, threading, and searching > > > > > to > > > > > allow for (nearly) limitless mailboxes but not download each and > > > > > every > > > > > header. > > > > > > > > Is there a "real IMAP client" which is free software? > > > > I have seen this "downloading *all* headers" behaviour with every free > > > > imap client I have tried. > > > > > > > > > > Not that I'm suggesting it, but pine doesn't show the "all headers" > > > behavior, and it's free. :-) > > > > > > Too bad they forgot that an imap folder can hold both messages and > > > subfolders, and they had to add a late hack to allow the correct > > > browsing of a Cyrus server. No client is perfect. > > > > > > Being an old-time user of Pine, it's always a pain to use Thunderbird or > > > Evolution, clients so feature-full but w/o decent imap behavior: > > > sometimes I have to switch back to Pine to be able to handle 50k+ new > > > messages per folder in a decent time (Pine takes negligible time to open > > > them). > > > > > > .TM. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > evolution maillist - [email protected] > > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution > > > > _______________________________________________ > > evolution maillist - [email protected] > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution > > -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
