[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again

From: chad
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] IMAP, again
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:24:57 -0700

On 24 Oct 2013, at 22:18, Lyndon Nerenberg <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Oct 24, 2013, at 10:13 PM, chad <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Beyond that, email messages are generally large (compared to calendar 
>> entries, anyway) collections of text. Changes to messages mostly involve 
>> small deltas to metadata. Managing changes to changes to changes based on 
>> revisions and times isn’t trivial, but a lot of the automation 
>> (conceptually) has already been written.
> I would really like to see evidence of this claim.  My experience of 
> manipulating email messages says otherwise.

I saw it a lot when I still used MH, but that was years back, when
8-10k messages a day wasn't unusual, and I was doing all my own
spam filtering. Modern usage patterns might be very different,

Out of curiosity, what common message change that's not metadata
do you see?


reply via email to

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