Daniel Kahoun wrote:
> Paul,
>
> I have currently problem with IMAP QUOTA extension. I searched for QUOTA in
> wiki documentation, but only one relevant (to my problem) information was at
>
> http://dbmail.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=er-model&s=quota
>
> - in dbmail_users table maxmail_size field
The following bug has been ASSIGNED.
==
http://www.dbmail.org/mantis/bug_view_advanced_page.php?bug_id=211
==
Reported By:frerichs
Assigned To
Recapping the thread:
``One thing I was thinking of would be a hack to make one server always
use only odd UIDs, and the other always use only even UIDs, and to do
catchups while they are reachable with each other. But this is getting
into hacking code I know nothing about, yet. Maybe a later time
On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 23:50 +, Aaron Stone wrote:
> Under the assumption that mail clients really do believe the UIDNEXT
> "optimization" -- this basically sucks the life out of any hope for
> lockless multimaster :-(
Yeah, that's the only conclusion I've come to.
> *takes Mark Crispin's nam
It looks like the Cyrus people are competent and are aware of the
problems.
If anyone has some silver bullets that show how to APPEND to two servers
that cannot see each other, I'd _love_ to hear about it. So would the
rest of the world.
Until then, I'd suggest the "simple" approach of either:
a
On Mon, May 30, 2005, Geo Carncross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> If anyone is scared of the token-passing software (implementation) I'm
> happy to help out here. It's _really_ not as difficult as it looks: it's
> one of those things. If your implementation isn't simple, you probably
> messed it up
> On Mon, May 30, 2005, Geo Carncross
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
>
>> If anyone is scared of the token-passing software
>> (implementation) I'm
>> happy to help out here. It's _really_ not as difficult
>> as it looks: it's
>> one of those things. If your implementation isn't
>> simple, you pro
