[MlMt] JMAP

[Bill Cole]

On 29 Jan 2015, at 11:05, Benny Kjær Nielsen wrote:

> On 28 Jan 2015, at 22:44, Mike Brasch wrote:
>
>> Do you have plans to support [JMAP](http://jmap.io/).
>
> Not yet, but I'm aware of this project and I'm on the mailing list to 
> keep an eye on it. It'll only be a high priority though if there is 
> easy access to a JMAP proxy for IMAP -- and I don't envy anyone having 
> to do that (a proxy would have a hard time handling the many IMAP 
> server bugs).

PLEASE don't touch it until there's an actual RFC, discrete unencumbered 
open source reference server (or IMAP proxy) & client implementations, 
and interoperable second client & server/proxy implementations.

There's probably some argument for JMAP that isn't grounded in whiny web 
developer laziness, but no one has put it anywhere Google can find it. 
And no, http://blog.fastmail.com/2014/12/23/jmap-a-better-way-to-email/ 
doesn't do it. Maybe FastMail is right, and we really do need a whole 
new protocol tightly bound to this year's favorite generic 
format+protocol (remind me again: what ever happened to XML? ASN.1? 
DCE/RPC? I'm old and forget these things...) On the other hand, maybe 
the problems they cite in IMAP can be fixed with extensions to IMAP. I 
don't really have an opinion on which way is better, but I do know that 
none of the grand plans to supplant existing email protocols in the past 
20+ years has really succeeded; the only partial success has been to 
replace POP with IMAP.