On 11/18/06, Tracy R Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You should not be storing email locally on your desktop IMHO. Your standard interface to email should be IMAP. That is what I use and I have no problem using squirrelmail, thunderbird, evolution, mutt, etc. all to talk to the same email source and the mail is always presented organized into folders just like I left it.
I agree, I suppose. All email on one server, served via IMAP. Yes. But, that should be location independent. Why isn't there a standard way of storing email locally, and accessing it via IMAP or something similar even though it's local? With fetchmail, for example, I have the luxury of treating email as a local phenomenon, with fetchmail itself taking email from a remote source and storing it locally, allowing it to be processed by email programs that treat mail as local. I just set up Thunderbird and it gave me two options for mail. Either I had an already existing Thunderbird folder (new installation of Linux, ergo I didn't) or it was remote (POP/IMAP). I just want some way of storing mail locally (maildir, etc.) that any Linux-aware app can recognize. I don't think that I should have to rely on an IMAP server to store email. It's not "The Unix Way" (TM).
The internal mail storage of any particular email client is specific to that email client and it not really something one can reasonably expect to be portable.
The internal mail storage of any particular email client should *not* be specific to that email client. Any extraneous markup, yes. The baseline email, no. -todd -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
