Subject: Re: problems using Netscape Messenger with IMAP and mh

From: "Kevin McEntee" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 16:10:54 -0700

Note:  Mike MacGirvin has forwarded me some mail from the c-client mailing
list.  I am now subscribed to 'c-client' and I hope I can help out whomever
started this thread.

I gather from the forwarded mail that there are 2 problems being discussed.

1. Communicator is displaying the wrong message when the user selects a
message for display.  This would seem to be a bug in Communicator.  If you can
give me more info about your server then maybe I can fix this problem.

2. Communicator does not allow the user to specify an alternate name for
INBOX.  Which clients allow this now?  If it is so important then why is it
not addressed in the RFC?  I must confess that since our first public Beta in
December, this is the first hint I've had that people want this.

- Kevin

---

From: "Peter Derr" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 97 17:40:21 -0400

Kevin,

> give me more info about your server then maybe I can fix this problem.

I'm using the UW IMAP 4rev1 beta (the latest).  The problem is the same
with the released UW IMAP4 server.

With the flat file mailbox format, it works OK.  

To use it with mh folders I specify "#mh" as the "IMAP mail directory"
in Communicator's mail preferences dialog box.  It discovers all my mh
folders correctly, even the nested ones.  I open a folder and the first
message is displayed fine, but then after that no matter which message
I pick the same first message from that first folder is displayed, even
if I switch folders.

> December, this is the first hint I've had that people want this.

Pine allows you to specify the INBOX name.  So does Sun's Solstice mail
client, so I can access my mh inbox, but it doesn't allow me to specify
#mh/ as the mail folder directory.

Peter

---

From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 18:23:47 -0700 (PDT)

On Mon, 07 Apr 1997 16:10:54 -0700, Kevin McEntee wrote:
> not addressed in the RFC?  I must confess that since our first public Beta
> in December, this is the first hint I've had that people want this.

The ability to access secondary folders is definitely addressed in the RFC.

Many advanced main environments support multiple inboxes, e.g. mrc+pine is my
INBOX for Pine-related mail.  It's important to recognize that while this is
accessed as if it were a secondary folder ("SELECT pine" at UW, or something
like "SELECT user.mrc.pine" or "SELECT inbox.pine" at CMU), this is definitely
not a secondary folder in my usage.  In fact, the folder accessed as "INBOX"
may be nothing more than the "miscellaneous junk, don't know how this is
categorized" folder.

The false notion that a user uses only one IMAP server is extremely common,
but is also remarkably short-sighted.  I routinely use two IMAP servers
simultaneously, and those are just my two most important IMAP servers.  It is
a major bug for any client to limit the user to one IMAP server.

I don't want to do client comparisons in public (or with a vendor); just let's
say that there are commercial and freeware clients which permit all this
today.

---

From: Bill Yeager <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 18:40:52 -0700 (PDT)

>a major bug for any client to limit the user to one IMAP server.

And has been since 1987 when Mark wrote the first IMAP client in Interlisp (:

Bill

---

From: Brian Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 20:35:14 -0700 (PDT)

> say that there are commercial and freeware clients which permit all this

Well, considering your position, that's probably wise.  But I'm not in the
same position, so what the heck. :)

I would recommend that any IMAP developer look at products like Mike
Macgirvin's ML (or heck, even the REAL old xlview that I ran on my Sun3).

It easily supports multiple mailboxes on multiple systems, moving items
between them, searching them for 'Logical Views' or 'Virtual Mailboxes',
which allows even one-giant-INBOX to be manageable.

I'm sure there are lots of ideas there for developers (including Mike's
current employer :)) to get some ideas from.  It's a nice clean client
that shows off all sorts of things that make IMAP much nicer than POP.

(And, yeah, I'm using Pine at the moment, but that's 'cause I'm home on
a pokey modem and it seems to deal with slow lines better... but on a
nice connection, ML makes my 200-300 pieces of mail a day manageable.)

TkRat is another intriguing client.  It has some quirks and is very early
code, but the product is nice, allowing trees of mailboxes, so you could
have a structure like:

    workmail ---  ProjectA ---- Financials
             |          +-------Engineering
             |          +-------Personnel  (etc)
             |--- ProjectB ---- Financials
                        +-------(etc)

    ispmailbox --- newsgroup_responses ---- comp.os.linux.advocacy
                                    +----- rec.games.roguelike.nethack

etc.

Both ML and TkRat are freeware and both show different ways of exploiting
the features of IMAP over POP3.

I would hate to see an IMAP client that treated IMAP like POP3.  I don't
even see much of a point in it.  POP3 will be with us for a LONG time,
like it or not, so why bother doing IMAP if you're not going to exploit
the features.