[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: 2 points: dovecot & Fedora list

when you ready this on dovecot.org org what in it makes you conclude that 
it doesn't support mbox format?

	Dovecot can work with standard mbox and maildir formats and it's fully 
	compatible with UW-IMAP and Courier IMAP servers as well as mail clients 
	accessing the mailboxes directly. I have also plans to support storing 
	mails in SQL databases.


 On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Marc Lucke 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.  I switched back to uw-imapd & will wait until it supports mbox 
> fully.  So at anytime I'm happy to be corrected, but isn't mbox the 
> standard format in linux?  If so, & dovecot doesn't yet support mbox, 
> then why should it be preferred for use over uw-imapd (leaving alone the 
> fact that Fedora automatically knocked out my uw-imap & replaced it with 
> cyrus-imapd all without any say from me!)
> (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?

Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       joelja darkwing uoregon edu    
GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]