o functionality.
>
> David B
> www.declude.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Fisher
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 3:20 PM
> To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
> Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] I
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Fisher
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 3:20 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there any hope running Declude with
imail8.21???
Yeah, throw us Pro users a couple of bones!
- Original Message -
From
Yeah, throw us Pro users a couple of bones!
- Original Message -
From: "Colbeck, Andrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:02 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there any hope running Declude with
imail8.21???
DB> 1. 3.0.3 in o
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there any hope running Declude with
imail8.21???
DB> 1. 3.0.3 in our testing has been considerably quicker than that of
earlier versions of Declude.
Dave, at the top of my suggested list for "new code" in declude.exe has been
to do robust MIME dec
___
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Horne
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:26 PM
> To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
> Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there any hope running
> Declude with imail8.21???
>
ECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:04 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there any hope running Declude with
imail8.21???
Dan,
What version for Declude Beta were you running? As we have not seen the
behavior you are referri
rSent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 2:04 PMTo:
Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there
any hope running Declude with imail8.21???
Dan,
What version for Declude Beta were you running? As we have
not seen the behavior you are referring to.
David B
www.declude.com
From: [
: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there
any hope running Declude with imail8.21???
Yes, we just today reverted back to 1.82 because our
single-processor machine backed up. At the worst there was an hour delay
in delivery. I specifically denoted it was a single-processor machine just
to indicate that
so I had to stop our beta test.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
MattSent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 12:11 PMTo:
Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there
any hope running Declude with imail8.21???
IMail 8.20+ is only compatible
IMail 8.20+ is only compatible with Declude 3+, but that software is
still in early beta and I wouldn't recommend it. This combination can
work, but it appears that the higher the volume you have, the more
likely you are to experience serious issues with E-mail backing up. I
have been using I
So anyway, now that I downgraded already, should I go to 8.21 again or are
there problems with >declude? I'm not crazy about running a beta version
of declude.
The beta seems decent, but their are some issues with multiprocessor
machines right now. Essentially it would go to sleep at the wron
Oh ouch, thats embarrising, you could have sent this off list!!! :) I KNOW I
didnt change that path, is there any chance upgrading to 8.21 somehow changed
it?
So anyway, now that I downgraded already, should I go to 8.21 again or are
there problems with declude? I'm not crazy about running a b
12 matches
Mail list logo
