Michael Fair wrote:
>
> Thanks for all the clarifications.
>
> To finish up on a point that you didn't fully understand
> and to make a recommendation for your evaluation,
>
> > > - being more comfortable with the concept of being able to make
> > > subfolders of all mailboxes than I am with any folder except INBOX,
> >
> > Not sure I understand this.
>
> Right now we can create subfolders of INBOX but not folders at
> the same level as INBOX. With the ANN we can create folders at
> the same level of INBOX but not subfolders of INBOX.
>
> I am more comfortable with an implementation that allows
> for the creation of folders and sub folders wherever the
> admin or user determines is appropriate without regard to
> whether the folder is named "inbox" or "foo".
I'm not sure that I see the need for both at the same time, but OK.
> > > - preferring that the on-disk structure match the mailstore presentation
> > > (and being that I prefer the alternate namespace I can't have this),
> >
> > This is obviously next to impossible when supporting two interchangeable
> > namespaces.
>
> True, but I don't think it would be very difficult to support
> both at the same time if we were willing to make a minor on-disk
> modification to add a folder called "inbox" underneath the folder
> "username". It seems to me that if we made INBOX an actual
> folder on-disk (lower cased of course) rather than a synonym
> for "username" all the problems with separate namespaces would
> go away. All folders created at the top level would appear at
> the top level including INBOX, and any subfolders of INBOX
> could be created there.
Interesting idea, that would solve the "can't create folders under
INBOX" problem with alt-namespace. Something to think about.
Ken
--
Kenneth Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd.
Software Engineer 21 Princeton Place
716-662-8973 x26 Orchard Park, NY 14127
--PGP Public Key-- http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp
