On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 23:47 -0600, Sankar P wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 10:13 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > I have a feeling, though, that the main reason Evo is so much slower
> > than Outlook is due to the summary info gathering which (used to?)
> > grab
> > all the mailing-list headers
On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 10:13 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> I have a feeling, though, that the main reason Evo is so much slower
> than Outlook is due to the summary info gathering which (used to?)
> grab
> all the mailing-list headers as well as the normal stuff in order to
> be
> able to vfolde
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 17:01 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> Hi Øystein
>
> On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 13:11 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote:
> > Google seem to be in the process of introducing IMAP support to GMail
> > [1]. Personally I think GMail offers an extremely attractive email
> > solution by now
One thing you could do which would be of use would be to sniff the
packets that Outlook sends to Google Mail's IMAP and log them for the
Evolution developers to read so that perhaps they can see what queries
Outlook is doing that is so much faster than what Evolution is doing and
maybe try to mimic
Hi Øystein
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 13:11 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote:
> Google seem to be in the process of introducing IMAP support to GMail
> [1]. Personally I think GMail offers an extremely attractive email
> solution by now. Evolution does already support integration with GMail
> via SMTP and P
Google seem to be in the process of introducing IMAP support to GMail
[1]. Personally I think GMail offers an extremely attractive email
solution by now. Evolution does already support integration with GMail
via SMTP and POP, and now also via IMAP. In addition to following the
IMAP standards as clo
