Re: [Evolution-hackers] IMAP4REV1

[Shreyas Sriniavasan <sshreyas novell com>]

Hey,

So personally i think we should disable/remove imap4 too and only
because maintaining
two implementations of IMAP without having *written* either is rather
hard. And since we need 
to pick one which is closest to feature completion i guess IMAP would
have to be the one. 

A migration strategy is quintessential but i really have no expertise in
making smart statements
on the same. Also worth some thought is supporting multiple namespaces
within IMAP which would make IMAP a super set of IMAP4.

Thats my two cents worth anyway,

Cheers,
Shreyas

On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 10:45 +0530, Harish Krishnaswamy wrote:
> hey guys,
> 
>   Given that the two of you have a huge stake here - possibly to fix
> bugs in IMAP4REV1 (if you choose so) - could you please let your views
> on this known ?
> 
> Harish
> 
> On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 16:18 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> > We need to make a decision about imap4rev1.
> 
> > We can either
> >  Leave it there, maybe add a warning about how buggy it is.  We're well
> > beyond string freeze though.
> > 
> >  Leave it there, but hack the code in nasty ways so that you can't
> > create new accounts using it.  Its a messy nasty hack.
> > 
> >  Remove it from the build entirely, and then add new migration code to
> > switch it to the older 'imap' implementation, or some other equivalent
> > switch over mechanism.  The folder paths, foldernames, cache, summary
> > files, are all probably so different as to make this a lot of work.
> > 
> >  Do nothing, don't make a decision.
> > 
> > Anything other than removing it then needs another decision on whether
> > we fix any bugs in the code or not.
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> evolution-hackers maillist  -  evolution-hackers lists ximian com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers