Re: [Dovecot] RFC 3516 - IMAP4 Binary Content Extension
On May 19, 2008, at 9:59 AM, Anton Yuzhaninov wrote: Timo Sirainen пишет: On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 02:48 +0400, Anton Yuzhaninov wrote: Is Binary Content Extension (rfc3516) support planned? It's not in my near-term plans. Where are you planning on using it? Are there some clients that support it? It may be useful in loaded web-mail applications (base64 decoding implemented in C is more cpu/memory efficient than in perl or other web scripting language). And may be we will use this extension in the webmail for our free- mail service (http://mail.rambler.ru) Popular desktop clients AFAIK don't support rfc3516. Is it possible to write plugin for support this extension? I think a plugin would be possible, since it's possible to add dynamically more FETCH handlers using imap_fetch_handlers_register(). With v1.1 this is even easier because you can use lib-mail/message- decoder.h to have Dovecot decode the base64/qp parts. Hmm. Although it forces translating charset to UTF-8, which isn't wanted with BINARY. I guess that part could have been made optional in the API.. PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] RFC 3516 - IMAP4 Binary Content Extension
Timo Sirainen пишет: On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 02:48 +0400, Anton Yuzhaninov wrote: Is Binary Content Extension (rfc3516) support planned? It's not in my near-term plans. Where are you planning on using it? Are there some clients that support it? It may be useful in loaded web-mail applications (base64 decoding implemented in C is more cpu/memory efficient than in perl or other web scripting language). And may be we will use this extension in the webmail for our free-mail service (http://mail.rambler.ru) Popular desktop clients AFAIK don't support rfc3516. Is it possible to write plugin for support this extension? -- WBR, Anton Yuzhaninov
Re: [Dovecot] RFC 3516 - IMAP4 Binary Content Extension
On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 02:48 +0400, Anton Yuzhaninov wrote: > Is Binary Content Extension (rfc3516) support planned? It's not in my near-term plans. Where are you planning on using it? Are there some clients that support it? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[Dovecot] RFC 3516 - IMAP4 Binary Content Extension
Is Binary Content Extension (rfc3516) support planned? -- WBR, Anton Yuzhaninov
