Re: IMAP-problems

[Darko Obradovic <dobradovic gmx de>]

On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 08:51:21 +0200
"M. Thielker" <balsa@t-data.com> wrote:


> Outbox is in fact a special case, Inbox used to be the same. I removed that 
> restriction a long time ago. With Inbox it was that pop3 was assuming that 
> it could always drop mail into a local (mbox) file.
> With Outbox, it seems to be little more complicated, because it is just a 
> mailbox, after all. Sure, ESMTP may require the message in a local file, 
> but I don't believe so. AFAIK the message is passed in memory.
> It's probably only historic and could be changed quite easily. Question is: 
> Why?
> An IMAP Outbox makes no sense. Outbox is a mailbox that needs fast access, 
> because all mail senr will pass through it.
> Also, it is normally emptied very frequently as mail is sent, so it would 
> never groew to outrageous sizes. Why put it on IMAP?

In my current situation I don't want any local folders at all. Target is to get completely independent of the computer I'm sitting at, as I change quite often between three of them. Usually, I don't use outbox at all. But assuming the smtp-server is down right now and I have to queue a message, it would be cool to get it sent two hours later from another comp instead of waiting three days to get back to the original computer. :)
Apart from that, it doesn't look that good having one box outside the only IMAP-tree *g* and balsa forces you to have an outbox...

bye,

Darko