Re: Anyone using $imap_home_namespace?
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 06:43:00AM -0700, Charles Killian wrote:
> I'm using UW-IMAPd, and can say that for my uses, $folder is good enough
> (at least in version 2002edebian1-13). One property I'm not setting
> however, is the one which tells mutt to only look at IMAP-subscribed
> folders. If that interplays with this somehow, I wouldn't know.
I don't remember anymore exactly what the issue was. Again, I haven't used Mutt
with UW-IMAPd in many years. I'd say, if we don't see any complaints on
Mutt-Users during the next couple of months, it's probably safe to assume that
most others also find $folder sufficient. If that's the case, I don't see any
reason not to reduce bloat by leaving $imap_home_namespace nuked.
Just my two cents,
- Dave
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 11:20:51AM +0000, Dave wrote:
> > Sorry for responding so late; I was away on vacation.
> >
> > IIRC, it's required for UW-IMAPd, unless you want to hardcode a whole bunch
> > of
> > stuff manually into your muttrc; IIRC, $folder wasn't sufficient. UW-IMAPd
> > is
> > still the default IMAP server on a number of GNU/Linux distros, including
> > Slackware. I no longer use UW-IMAPd, so I can't confirm.
> >
> > - Dave
> >
> > BTW - Has anybody heard from Steve? He's either ignoring my emails, or not
> > getting them, or not noticing them, or something. . .
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 06:06:47PM -0700, Brendan Cully wrote:
> > > I'd like to yank the $imap_home_namespace option. I don't think it
> > > does anything sensible. It's mostly just confusing.
> > >
> > > Would anyone mind if I pulled it?
> >
>
> --
> ====
> Chip Killian
> http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/~ckillian/
> UCSD Graduate Student, Computer Science