On 8/12/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > IMHO the mailbox design suffers from being a compromise between a good > IMAP API and a good general API. the interface and implementation is > over-complicated but there are many features which are likely to be > IMAP specific in what was intended to be a general API.
Yeah, i see that now. I've tried to understand the current TorqueMailbox stuff, the lots of listeners, and mappings, but finally i've just copy-pasted the relevant codes with some minor restructuring. When I will have more time, I definitely want to look into througly. The good news is that i've been able to finish my hibernate/spring based implementation, of course it's not very tested, and more experimental than the experimental modules of James :) However during my struggle with IMAP i fixed some bugs, made some improvements here and there (i've created JIRA issues about), so I think I'm reasonably successful in this case. I hope you can apply the patches. Currently I have just one IMAP related question. I see in the current implementation that there is a 'Namespace' conception (however most of the time it's hard coded), which is intended to provide some top-level grouping possibilities for mailboxes. So for example the administrator can create a #shared-dev namespace which every user can read/write. However from the code/and the incuded IMAP spec fragments, it's not clear how the clients will discover this 'namespace' things. I mean, the LIST command should only list mailboxes from the specified 'reference', so for example LIST "" "*" will list from #mail.username.INBOX ... but not #shared-dev.anything. Am I misses some hidden commands, which not implemented yet, and neither Thunderbird, KMail nor Evolution ever call without some server issued message? BR, Zsombor
