[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] exciting new stuff for 2.0 (IMAP proposal)

From: Lyndon Nerenberg
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] exciting new stuff for 2.0 (IMAP proposal)
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2006 13:06:13 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20060105)

> This could be

done with a file on the server, since IMAP allows fairly free form
file retrieval,

Don't count on that. Only uw-imap thinks it's a file server. Most servers will enforce at least minimal RFC2822 compliance on the data they serve up, let alone accept via APPEND.

or it could be done with flags where the server permits
the definition of new flags.
Yes, and this is much more portable than the hack you describe above. But beware of namespace issues. Twice (thrice?) upon a time I started on a draft that would allow for a reserved-for-vendors chunk of the flag namespace. I really should finish the damned thing.

I don't think there would be performance
issues with either option, but using flags is definitely better for
data integrity where the mail might be accessed by different clients.

You should also take a look at ANNOTATE. It's a lot heavier than using flags, but gives you a lot more flexibility (when you have a server that supports ANNOTATE, of course).


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]