[MlMt] JMAP support
list.mailmate at munkynet.org
Fri Jan 11 15:25:28 EST 2019
I guess we’ll have to wait and see how things pan out.
On 11 Jan 2019, at 15:21, Randall Gellens wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2019, at 12:10, Sam Hathaway wrote:
>> On 11 Jan 2019, at 14:58, Randall Gellens wrote:
>>> An IMAP-JMAP proxy just moves the complexity of dealing with the
>>> myriad of IMAP servers from core MailMate to an embedded proxy. I
>>> don't see it providing that much help, while it would undoubtedly
>>> introduce its own set of problems.
>> If coordinated right, it would centralize the thankless work of
>> kludging around nonstandard, broken IMAP server implementations.
>> Imagine if, instead of each MUA author having to develop, test, and
>> maintain dozens of ugly hacks, they were collaborating to improve a
>> single JMAP proxy codebase that all could use.
> That could be a great thing. Or it could be just one more variant for
> a client to support, potentially multiple variants if the proxy
> behaves differently depending on which IMAP server it is facing. Done
> well, a universal proxy could help. But then, done well, IMAP is
>>> As I said earlier, while JMAP might be very cool, it doesn’t help
>>> the core problem of widely variant IMAP server behavior; instead, it
>>> just introduces yet more variants.
>> It does move us towards solving the problem of IMAP being kinda trash
>> for resource-constrained clients with slow network connections.
> As I mentioned before, IMAP was originally designed for extremely slow
> dial-up lines that were prone to sudden disconnection. Many of the
> features of IMAP are specifically for the problems of communication in
> that environment.
>> I think it’s telling that many of the major email providers
>> (Google, Microsoft, and FastMail, at least) felt the need to create
>> their own proprietary mail access protocols for use by their mobile
>> apps. What this says to me is that IMAP is not fit-for-purpose when
>> it comes to smartphone apps.
> Maybe, or maybe many of the big providers didn't want to spend the
> time to figure out how to do IMAP well, and/or saw competitive
> advantages of having their own protocol. There's a long-standing
> problem of players big and small doing poor jobs of implementing
> standards. In some cases, it was clear that developers read the RFC
> examples but not the normative text.
> mailmate mailing list
> mailmate at lists.freron.com
More information about the mailmate