On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 08:20:11AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 22Sep2020 17:46, Chris Green <c...@isbd.net> wrote: > >Does mutt still use the (IMHO silly) maildir hierarchy where mail > >'folders' are simply represented by another '.' and name in the > >maildir directory name? > > Are you talking about browsing a Maildir hierarchy from mutt, or just > the physical structure on disc? > The actual structure on disk, as I explained I often move stuff around and/or rename things, or check on space usage directly from the command line and the maildir++ format makes this *very* difficult.
> I don't browse from within mutt (but see Kevin's reply) but I do have a > directory hierarchy. Admittedly it is shallow and does not have Maildirs > inside Maildirs, but my own folders are like this: > > ~/mail/foldername # top level "current" folders > ~/mail/OLD/YYYY/foldername # archived folders > ~/mail/O/foldername # this year's archived folders > > I've just got (d)elete bound to move messages into > "O/current-folder-name", and "O" is just a symlink to > "OLD/the-current-year". > > So no Maildirs inside Maildirs, but several subdirectories. > I don't think I want Maildirs inside Maildirs, mbox can't do that so I don't expect it. > Oh, don't forget: don't name any of your folders "tmp" or "cur" or > "new", those names are special for Maildir. > Yes, easily forgotten, especially tmp. :-) -- Chris Green
