2 points: dovecot & Fedora list

[Kenneth Porter]

--On Wednesday, June 23, 2004 7:06 PM +1000 Marc Lucke <marc at marcsnet.com> 
wrote:

> (1)  Dovecot:  I was very embarrassed indeed.  I read the dovecot site to
> find that it did not yet properly support mbox format.  How sad for me.

Version 1.x had some issues with mbox, but 0.95 (shipped with Fedora) works 
fine. Recent 1.x prereleases claim to be much more stable, and some claim 
to be using it for production.

There's no "standard" mailbox format. mbox has the most history, but 
maildir is also quite popular, and UW-IMAP also supports its own mbx format.

> (2)  someone answered in a previous post suggesting all sorts of
> resources and mailing-lists I can subsribe to for non Fedora specific
> posts.  I thank that person for the information but point out that given
> fedora is made up of packages that have mailing-lists elsewhere, then
> what is the fedora list actually for?  Theoretically there should be no
> posts to the list at all!  Kernel problems -> kernel, dovecot issues ->
> dovecot etc.  The next point is this:  I didn't chose to move from
> uw-imapd.  I was quite happy with it.  Installing FC2 made that choice
> for me.  Is it therefore not relevant to point out any flaws about
> dovecot or ask questions to the fedora list?

My policy is to post here for issues about a package when it involves its 
interaction with FC. For issues there are specific to the package and not 
OS-related, I post to the package's list. For example, if there was an 
issue with Dovecot's filesystem layout (set by RPM packaging) or its 
interaction with other packages I'd post here.

This list is more a place for new users who don't yet know about the 
per-package lists and don't know where to ask a question to get the best 
result.