=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Claus_F=E4rber?= writes:
> Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb/wrote:
> > And how would you propose handling a virtual mailbox farm, mailboxes that
> > have no dedicated system userid assigned to them?
> > It's not exactly obvious, is it?
>
> Where would you put mailbox files then? Simply put your maildirs there.
I really don't care where I would put the mailbox files. I'm talking about
maildirs exclusively, and what makes the most amount of sense with
Maildirs. Putting maildirs somewhere where you normally keep mailbox files,
simply because of the deficiencies of the mailbox format, doesn't make
sense to me.
> > Most MUAs are now using IMAP, so this is quickly becoming irrelevant.
>
> Then simply do whatever your imapd does and don't worry about
> compatibility.
Since I am writing my imapd, this is my call.
> On the other hand, maybe there are different IMAP
> servers, web gateways etc. that should use the same strucutre.
>
> In other words: Why use an incompatible format if you can use one that
> is already there?
There is no established custom for maintaining maildir-based folders. As
far as I know, there are no IMAP servers who natively support maildirs.
The only thing I'm aware of is a patch to UW-IMAP. That does not a
standard make.
> > No longer relevant. Any MUA worth its salt is capable of using IMAP,
> > right now, no matter how ugly IMAP really is. So, all you have to do is
> > standardize on an IMAP server,
>
> Yes, and the best solution IMO is to use the "standard" that has already
> been set by user agents.
There is no such standard either. Every MUA I've seen does this
differently.
--
Sam
