Serge Knystautas wrote: > Getting IMAP to production quality is far enough away that it > will not > get there by individual contributions, and will require probably one > champion to get it to a usable state.
That is probably correct, but also a shame as a lot of effort has been expended on developing IMAP support. Rather than waste it, perhaps there is a way of sub-dividing the functionality required to put it in place. If we could come up with a roadmap of all of the required pieces and their current status we might find a way of lightening the load for existing contributors and find new contributors with an 'itch' to move a particular piece forward or develop one of the missing pieces. I'm not sure what any of the roadblocks are. As I remember it, outstanding activities include adding sub-folder support to the repositories and per-user attributes. If existing IMAP developers could come up with interface specs. for these and what else they require, maybe others could implement them. Personally, I don't have the time to implement anything more than I am currently committed to, but would be happy to help in breaking out the required pieces for IMAP and defining the interfaces for those pieces. Of course I have a vested interest. To be useful, jSieve needs per user attributes and really comes into its own when running atop an IMAP store. I would like that incorporated into James as soon as possible. -- Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
