[Imap-protocol] re: GMail
tjs at psaux.com
Mon Oct 29 18:27:40 PDT 2007
Mark Crispin wrote:
> I think that there is much more opposition to adding to a base
> specification than to a service level. A new base specification
> purported kills the previous one; whereas a service level might get
> ignored at a particular point.
> Sometimes how you call things does matter!
Well, I think that's true, but it's clear that base specifications get
I don't have a feel for which is the easier path, but I am fearful of
the work involved in IMAP5, because I think it will bring out the trolls.
If we were to add a single client-side capability, we could provide a
general mechanism. I think it's desirable if we encourage client
capabilities to be bundled, but I think requiring it is a mistake.
I don't believe IMAP5 would provide this flexibility.
More information about the Imap-protocol