Re: [Evolution-hackers] CamelFolder updates

[Jamie Zawinski <jwz jwz org>]

NotZed wrote:
> 
> There are often other ways of identifing messages
> other than their index in an array (address of summary?  checksum
> of headers?).

I used both of: message ID, and position of message in folder.
That gives good error checking: if message N has the ID you expect,
everything is fine; otherwise, you look it up by ID (and risk getting
a different copy of that message than you expected -- not a disaster.)

> I've said all along something as broken as pop should just movemail
> to an mbox (which is basically exactly what evolution mail has to do
> anyway, because otherwise it can't apply filters very easily).

I certainly hope there's not still any debate about this.

POP is a mail retrieval protocol.  It is not a folder access protocol.
POP is like movemail, not like IMAP.  I can't see how anyone who has
actually read the POP spec could think otherwise.   POP's not a *broken*
folder access protocol -- it's not a folder access protocol at all!

-- 
Jamie Zawinski
jwz jwz org             http://www.jwz.org/
jwz dnalounge com       http://www.dnalounge.com/