On Oct 24, 2013, at 11:35 AM, Joel Uckelman <uckelman(_at_)nomic(_dot_)net>
wrote:
I looked this over a bit and wasn't able to satisfy myself as to what
OfflineIMAP would do.
For many years now my primary email engine has been IMAP. The driving force
behind this is that I need to access my mail folders from a wide range of
systems in many locations. The role MH plays in my life is in local enclaves
where I have small clusters of machines that exist (mostly) in isolation.
E.g., on my network here on the boat I use MH to handle all the internal mail
traffic. But anything going outside that domain inevitably goes through an
IMAP client, if only so that a copy of my outbound mail gets saved in the
outbox folder on my IMAP server.
Something like offlineimap could change all of that. A local MH view of my
IMAP server would be a godsend in many ways. And for me, the manual sync model
actually fits very well with how I do things.
The big question I have is: how well does offlineimap handle merge conflicts
between >2 competing offline clients? This is *not* an easy problem to solve.
That said, I'm going to take the code for a run and see how it does. If I
can't break it with some >2 clients accessing tests, it could be worth looking
at adding MH folder support. Teaching offlineimap about MH folders is
guaranteed to be less painful than teaching MH about IMAP.
--lyndon
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers