Re: [Evolution] Making the switch to Evolution

[Alfredo Matos <alfredo matos digitalself org>]

Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 14:39 +0000, Alfredo Matos wrote:
> > Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> >
> > > AFAIK the behaviour depends on the IMAP server. For example, the Cyrus
> > > default is for the user's namespace to hang from INBOX, which is how the
> > > CMU people apparently wanted it. The Cyrus admin can change this at
> > > installation time (to an "anonymous root" model) but it's a system-wide
> > > change. I don't know about Courier but I would guess it's similar.
> > >
> > > Of course the mail client doesn't have to go along with this, but Evo
> > > does. I guess it's the way to get consistency across multiple MUAs with
> > > the same server.
> > >
> > > poc
> > Honestly, the MUA does not have to comply, but IMAP Namespaces is a
> > standard. Lacking to comply with standards eventually leads to errors
> > and abandon in favor of a compliant MUA. If Evolution cannot deal
> > properly with the IMAP namespace my mailserver provides, how can i trust
> > it to create folder correctly and manage my mailboxes in a trustworthy way ?
>
> My point is that Evo probably *is* dealing properly with the namespace
> (i.e. representing it as the server has it). It's the other clients that
> aren't doing so, but you'd need to check with the server admin.
>
> poc

Somehow i find t hard to believe that every other MUA gets it wrong, and
only evolution gets it right...

I am my own server's admin, and everything seems fine. Thunderbird has
no problems with the namespace represenation, neither sylpheed-claws and
neither does squirrelmail...

So having said that, i would see this as a bug and not as feature.

regards,
Alfredo