[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Nmh-workers] SMTP/IMAP/POP Support

From: Michael Richardson
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] SMTP/IMAP/POP Support
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 08:54:52 -0500

>>>>> "Ken" == Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> writes:
    >> I will look at slocal again for inteface to fetchmail and try to
    >> write a FAQ on this --- I'm in favour of removing as much as
    >> possible in the POP/IMAP/SMTP side of nmh, but I also want the
    >> nmh-over-fuse-does-IMAP to work in someway.

    Ken> Let me try a different tactic: Why do you want to mess with my
    Ken> shit?

    Ken> I mean, fine, you have post send your email to the
    Ken> /usr/sbin/sendmail program/API; that doesn't bother me.  It
    Ken> works fine for you, and it doesn't really affect me.  I'm all
    Ken> for keeping functionality people find useful in nmh.  But you
    Ken> want to REMOVE functionality that I USE; you're messing with my
    Ken> shit, and I don't really understand why.  If you don't use the
    Ken> current POP/SMTP functionality in nmh, I don't see how keeping
    Ken> it really affects you.

woe... I said, "as much as possible" --- I mean, let's remove things
that truly *NOBODY* uses.   

I *WANT* POP support in inc --- but I'm cool if we get "modern" POP
interface by having inc popen(3) fetchmail, or link against it's
library, if that's more sane than fixing the code that's there to do
stuff like POP/SSL.

]       He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] address@hidden http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
                       then sign the petition. 

reply via email to

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