Does anyone know of a reasonably up to date (i.e. still maintained) webmail application that can use local mbox files?
I have been trying a couple of webmail applications with IMAP servers (both UW Imap and dovecot) but the IMAP implementations are so awful that they make them very awkward to use IMHO.
Chris Green wrote:
Does anyone know of a reasonably up to date (i.e. still maintained) webmail application that can use local mbox files?
No. Why the fixation on mbox files? They're not very efficient for CGI or PHP use. Probably need to look for an application server webmail (Zope?) or one with some sort of daemon.
I have been trying a couple of webmail applications with IMAP servers (both UW Imap and dovecot) but the IMAP implementations are so awful that they make them very awkward to use IMHO.
Another IMAP server that I think handles mbox is imap4d from the GNU mailutils. I've never tried it (but probably should). http://www.gnu.org/software/mailutils/manual/html_node/mailutils_44.html
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 03:55:26PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
Chris Green wrote:
Does anyone know of a reasonably up to date (i.e. still maintained) webmail application that can use local mbox files?
No. Why the fixation on mbox files? They're not very efficient for CGI or PHP use. Probably need to look for an application server webmail (Zope?) or one with some sort of daemon.
Because they *are* efficient and convenient for a local MUA to use and since that's 90% or more of my use for them I'd like to keep them that way. If it slows down a webmail application (a bit) then it's really no worry, there will only ever be one or two users.
I have been trying a couple of webmail applications with IMAP servers (both UW Imap and dovecot) but the IMAP implementations are so awful that they make them very awkward to use IMHO.
Another IMAP server that I think handles mbox is imap4d from the GNU mailutils. I've never tried it (but probably should). http://www.gnu.org/software/mailutils/manual/html_node/mailutils_44.html
Is that not just the UW IMAP server being re-distributed?
However my main compaint is with the rubbish way the webmail (and other) clients handle IMAP, the general idea seems to be that they show me how the IMAP server works - which should be transparent.
My major compaints are:- I don't really want to know about INBOX, I want to be able to call the place where mail arrives something other than INBOX. I might even want mail to arrive in more than one place. There's nothing in the IMAP RFC that required that the *client* has to put up with INBOX.
I want to see all my folders by default, not just SUBSCRIBEd ones. Again the IMAP RFCs don't say that only SUBSCRIBEd folders should be visible.
I don't want Draft and Trash folders created 'automatically' for me.
I don't want *all* folders displayed, just those at one level, I have hundreds (if not thousands) of folders in my mail hierarchy but only tens at any one level.
I have yet to find any MUA (let alone a webmail one) that makes much sense of IMAP servers.
Chris Green chris@areti.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 03:55:26PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote: [...]
Another IMAP server that I think handles mbox is imap4d from the GNU mailutils. I've never tried it (but probably should). http://www.gnu.org/software/mailutils/manual/html_node/mailutils_44.html
Is that not just the UW IMAP server being re-distributed?
Looking at the Changelog suggests not. Even if it is, then it's been forked for over 5 years.
However my main compaint is with the rubbish way the webmail (and other) clients handle IMAP, the general idea seems to be that they show me how the IMAP server works - which should be transparent.
Yes, IMAP clients usually get to the "it works" stage and leaves the rest to the user. The few that don't make assumptions about the names of your folders which are unwarranted.
I think the c-client libraries from UW used a strange syntax and most mail clients just left users to type in that odd collection of braces and brackets. That wasn't too bad if you had a server guru who told you what to do, but no fun if you were setting up both sides yourself.
On the client side, I found GNUmail was fairly easy when I last used it for IMAP (2 minor versions ago), but it wants at least one Draft/Sent combinations (can be local rather than IMAP) I agree that good IMAP is very rare. Anyone seen a recent review or willing to help write one?
-
Chris Green -
MJ Ray