Re: [Evolution] Making the switch to Evolution

On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 16:40 +0000, Alfredo Matos wrote:
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.


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.


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.

It's only a bug if you don't like it. Some people do like it and would
consider the alternative to be a bug. Personally I prefer the "rootless"
model (which is what you want) but I get it because my IMAP server
(Cyrus) is configured to work that way.


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