[MlMt] JMAP support
Benny Kjær Nielsen
mailinglist at freron.com
Wed Jan 16 05:29:20 EST 2019
On 11 Jan 2019, at 20:58, Randall Gellens wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2019, at 7:07, Benny Kjær Nielsen wrote:
>> The last one is maybe the most likely one, but given the complexity
>> of the current IMAP implementation (in order to handle all kinds of
>> issues) I kind of doubt that it's possible. A proxy which only works
>> well with some IMAP servers is currently of little use to me.
> 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.
That's kind of what I was trying to say :-) It's only a help to me if
I'm not making the proxy and it handles more IMAP issues than my own
>> Note: This does not mean that I think JMAP is a bad idea. It's just
>> not for MailMate yet.
> 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.
Yes, from my perspective an IMAP->IMAP proxy would actually be more
useful since it would allow me to tell users to use the proxy whenever
some weird IMAP issue was not handled well by MailMate :-)
Also, as soon as multiple JMAP implementations exist then some of them
are likely to be buggy or limited in some way -- and then I'm making
What is really needed is a comprehensive test suite which users can
*easily* use to test a given IMAP provider. It kind of
[exists](https://imapwiki.org/ImapTest/ServerStatus), but it's too hard
to use. I'm thinking something like what the [acid
tests](http://acid3.acidtests.org) did for web browsers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the mailmate