Re: mutt development status
On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 07:47:46PM +0100, Paul Walker wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 02:05:15PM -0400, John J. Foster wrote:
>
> > What about being able to search multiple IMAP folders simultaneously,
> > preferably server-side?
>
> That requires big changes to the server software and extensions to the IMAP
> protocol, so it's a bit out of scope for mutt... ;-)
If you're just referring to server-side searches, ok. But the ability to
search across multiple folders, even Pine (yuck) has that.
>
> > What about showing count of unread, as well as new?
>
> That's insanely slow for mbox files. It could be done for maildir, I
> suppose, if someone wanted to hack it together/
But what about those who don't use mbox? What about IMAP? Because it's
slow for mbox, it shouldn't be offered as a /choice/ for others? This
has been my biggest beef since I started using mutt. I normally keep
mutt running all the time on my shell account, and just detach the
screen session (although my ISP has recently upgraded and installed a
"daemon reaper", which I don't have a clue what that is, except my
screen sessions keep dying). Back to the point, why shouldin't I be able to
leave a folder without having read all the new mail, but still be able
to tell if there was unread mail there. Cache an f'ing flag somewhere.
The only time you've gotta deal with it is when mutt is first opened.
Unless I'm way off base. But other clients seem to be able to handle it.
John
>
> --
> Paul, who should point out he's also not a mutt developer
--
The revolution will not be televised.