"also, good luck with subfolders under inbox."
What exactly is the problem?
I have quite a lot of folders under INBOX (using Thunderbird). Sieve sorts my mailing lists subscriptions under INBOX/ML/$mailinglistname, and Thunderbird picks them up fine once you subscribe (IMAP terminology) to the folder and check the folder property checkbox - "When getting new messages for this account, always check this folder".
Only time I've had issues is with MUAs on mobile devices, Android's Email app and K9 are both broken in this aspect.
On 01/15/2013 02:09 AM, staticsafe wrote:
"also, good luck with subfolders under inbox."
What exactly is the problem?
there is a known quirk with mozilla's thunderbird email client involving an email account's Inbox that has sub-folders.
due to high email traffic that goes thru Inbox, there is a possibility of the Inbox _email_file_ becoming corrupt.
the cause of this happening can be for various reasons. the main cause, i believe, is from auto compact being enabled and new emails arriving when thunderbird is trying to do maintenance on file for emails that have been moved elsewhere by filter action.
another problem that can happen and mozilla does recognize it, if you keep a lot of old emails in Inbox, there is a possibility of file becoming corrupt. mozilla recommends that Inbox be maintained with as few emails as possible. i recommend to _keep_it_cleaned_-_period_.
there is a condition in the filter 'match' setting called
( ) Match all messages
which i use as last filter of each email account to move emails to folder 'Local Folders/all-other'. i have considered adding sub-folders to it, but my filtering is extensive enough that i seldom have any emails hit 'all-other'.
in your case, you could add sub-folders with name of you email accounts. that is up to you. what ever makes things simple to maintain is the main goal.
there have been a number of posters on the 'support thunderbird list' complaining about an account having a corrupted Inbox.
there have been many suggestions for a cure made. the one that works is to move *all* Inbox sub-folders out from under Inbox folder. they can be moved anywhere and i recommend they be moved to a place below the 'Local Folders' folder. cure rate by doing so is 100%
there is/was a page on one of non mozilla owned mozilla support sites that recommends no sub-folder and it gave same reasons i found to be. i thought i had bookmarked site, but i have yet to find it. it does not shown up with a google search.
so, now you know what i meant in wishing you good luck.
also, understand this, you may not have a problem now, your setup could go on forever. then again, it might hit you.
consider what and how much you have to lose vs the short time spent in dragging folders to a new location.
when you drag and drop folders to a new position, thunderbird's filter routine will rewrite your filters to show new position so you do not have to rewrite any filter rules.
now you can see, and i hope understand, why i did not want to reply to your question in thread i started. if a fedora, or any other user ran a search with "Subject: folders under Inbox", they would never find what they were looking for.
there are enough answers to problems out there that are no where related to "Subject:" line. i did not see advantage of adding another and hiding a solution.
i do hope this helps you make decision to move folders. ___
congratulations for your choice of wording in "Subject:".
tho next time, i would recommend "ping: geleem". i have a filer for that. (GBWG)
Opa. Metaxa.
On 01/15/2013 04:02 AM, g wrote: <>
oops. my apoligies. i did not mention one thing about moving folders out from under Inbox.
before you make moves, if you do, that is, turn on logging for accounts. this way, should there be any errors, you will have the logs to help you find problem.
of all the recommendations that i have made, there where no problems in doing so. filter logs are a cyoa* measure.
* cyoa = cover your own ass
much luck to you.
On 1/14/2013 23:02, g wrote:
On 01/15/2013 02:09 AM, staticsafe wrote:
"also, good luck with subfolders under inbox."
What exactly is the problem?
there is a known quirk with mozilla's thunderbird email client involving an email account's Inbox that has sub-folders.
due to high email traffic that goes thru Inbox, there is a possibility of the Inbox _email_file_ becoming corrupt.
OK, now I'm worried.
the cause of this happening can be for various reasons. the main cause, i believe, is from auto compact being enabled and new emails arriving when thunderbird is trying to do maintenance on file for emails that have been moved elsewhere by filter action.
I don't think I enabled auto-compact manually, I don't know if its enabled by default, time to find out I guess.
another problem that can happen and mozilla does recognize it, if you keep a lot of old emails in Inbox, there is a possibility of file becoming corrupt. mozilla recommends that Inbox be maintained with as few emails as possible. i recommend to _keep_it_cleaned_-_period_.
This one I got covered, I maintain an "inbox zero" policy with all my accounts, mails are filtered directly without ever seeing my "INBOX" folder.
there is a condition in the filter 'match' setting called
( ) Match all messages
which i use as last filter of each email account to move emails to folder 'Local Folders/all-other'. i have considered adding sub-folders to it, but my filtering is extensive enough that i seldom have any emails hit 'all-other'.
in your case, you could add sub-folders with name of you email accounts. that is up to you. what ever makes things simple to maintain is the main goal.
there have been a number of posters on the 'support thunderbird list' complaining about an account having a corrupted Inbox.
there have been many suggestions for a cure made. the one that works is to move *all* Inbox sub-folders out from under Inbox folder. they can be moved anywhere and i recommend they be moved to a place below the 'Local Folders' folder. cure rate by doing so is 100%
there is/was a page on one of non mozilla owned mozilla support sites that recommends no sub-folder and it gave same reasons i found to be. i thought i had bookmarked site, but i have yet to find it. it does not shown up with a google search.
so, now you know what i meant in wishing you good luck.
also, understand this, you may not have a problem now, your setup could go on forever. then again, it might hit you.
consider what and how much you have to lose vs the short time spent in dragging folders to a new location.
when you drag and drop folders to a new position, thunderbird's filter routine will rewrite your filters to show new position so you do not have to rewrite any filter rules.
This is the thing, I don't use Thunderbird's filter system at all. All my filtering is done server side by a Dovecot plugin called Sieve as I mentioned. This is useful as I use Thunderbird on multiple devices and OSes and I don't have to bother to keep my filters in sync. Also I get to write filters in my favourite editor which is great too. :)
So my situation is - Thunderbird doesn't see any "filtering", as far its concerned, messages just randomly appear in folders. :)
I am not too worried about losing e-mails due to corruption as this is essentially my mailing list e-mail and most if not all of them are publicly archived. :)
now you can see, and i hope understand, why i did not want to reply to your question in thread i started. if a fedora, or any other user ran a search with "Subject: folders under Inbox", they would never find what they were looking for.
there are enough answers to problems out there that are no where related to "Subject:" line. i did not see advantage of adding another and hiding a solution.
i do hope this helps you make decision to move folders. ___
congratulations for your choice of wording in "Subject:".
tho next time, i would recommend "ping: geleem". i have a filer for that. (GBWG)
Noted. Thanks for your elaboration.
Opa. Metaxa.
On 01/14/2013 11:47 PM, staticsafe wrote:
On 1/14/2013 23:02, g wrote:
On 01/15/2013 02:09 AM, staticsafe wrote:
"also, good luck with subfolders under inbox."
What exactly is the problem?
there is a known quirk with mozilla's thunderbird email client involving an email account's Inbox that has sub-folders.
due to high email traffic that goes thru Inbox, there is a possibility of the Inbox _email_file_ becoming corrupt.
OK, now I'm worried.
the cause of this happening can be for various reasons. the main cause, i believe, is from auto compact being enabled and new emails arriving when thunderbird is trying to do maintenance on file for emails that have been moved elsewhere by filter action.
I don't think I enabled auto-compact manually, I don't know if its enabled by default, time to find out I guess.
another problem that can happen and mozilla does recognize it, if you keep a lot of old emails in Inbox, there is a possibility of file becoming corrupt. mozilla recommends that Inbox be maintained with as few emails as possible. i recommend to _keep_it_cleaned_-_period_.
This one I got covered, I maintain an "inbox zero" policy with all my accounts, mails are filtered directly without ever seeing my "INBOX" folder.
there is a condition in the filter 'match' setting called
( ) Match all messages
which i use as last filter of each email account to move emails to folder 'Local Folders/all-other'. i have considered adding sub-folders to it, but my filtering is extensive enough that i seldom have any emails hit 'all-other'.
in your case, you could add sub-folders with name of you email accounts. that is up to you. what ever makes things simple to maintain is the main goal.
there have been a number of posters on the 'support thunderbird list' complaining about an account having a corrupted Inbox.
there have been many suggestions for a cure made. the one that works is to move *all* Inbox sub-folders out from under Inbox folder. they can be moved anywhere and i recommend they be moved to a place below the 'Local Folders' folder. cure rate by doing so is 100%
there is/was a page on one of non mozilla owned mozilla support sites that recommends no sub-folder and it gave same reasons i found to be. i thought i had bookmarked site, but i have yet to find it. it does not shown up with a google search.
so, now you know what i meant in wishing you good luck.
also, understand this, you may not have a problem now, your setup could go on forever. then again, it might hit you.
consider what and how much you have to lose vs the short time spent in dragging folders to a new location.
when you drag and drop folders to a new position, thunderbird's filter routine will rewrite your filters to show new position so you do not have to rewrite any filter rules.
This is the thing, I don't use Thunderbird's filter system at all. All my filtering is done server side by a Dovecot plugin called Sieve as I mentioned. This is useful as I use Thunderbird on multiple devices and OSes and I don't have to bother to keep my filters in sync. Also I get to write filters in my favourite editor which is great too. :)
So my situation is - Thunderbird doesn't see any "filtering", as far its concerned, messages just randomly appear in folders. :)
I am not too worried about losing e-mails due to corruption as this is essentially my mailing list e-mail and most if not all of them are publicly archived. :)
now you can see, and i hope understand, why i did not want to reply to your question in thread i started. if a fedora, or any other user ran a search with "Subject: folders under Inbox", they would never find what they were looking for.
there are enough answers to problems out there that are no where related to "Subject:" line. i did not see advantage of adding another and hiding a solution.
i do hope this helps you make decision to move folders. ___
congratulations for your choice of wording in "Subject:".
tho next time, i would recommend "ping: geleem". i have a filer for that. (GBWG)
Noted. Thanks for your elaboration.
Opa. Metaxa.
So just to clarify for someone like me.....who has a three sub-folders under my GMail account running on TB. You're saying I should move those folders to the "Local Folder" on my computer and away from under the Inbox for GMail? I have filters set up in TB that send certain e-mail addresses to those folders.....will the filters still work when I move them? (I have folders for the Fedora Users Group....the CEntOS Users Group...and the Scientific Linux Users Group!) Just want to know before I go and move them....also these same folders are also existent on the GMail servers, will my moving the ones on TB affect those as well?...
EGO II
On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 11:47 -0500, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote:
So just to clarify for someone like me.....who has a three sub-folders under my GMail account running on TB. You're saying I should move those folders to the "Local Folder" on my computer and away from under the Inbox for GMail? I have filters set up in TB that send certain e-mail addresses to those folders.....will the filters still work when I move them?
I use Gmail (in IMAP mode) on several large accounts, but with Evolution as the client. However I have also used TBird quite extensively and haven't noticed any problems. If you're going to copy mail to a local folder rather than leave it on the server then the fact that it came from Gmail is irrelevant.
Personally I leave everything on the server and do most of my filtering there as well (using Gmail's builtin filters), which means I can see the same folder structure from anywhere and don't have to worry about exporting and importing filters, a notoriously error-prone practice.
poc
On 01/15/2013 04:47 AM, staticsafe wrote: <>
OK, now I'm worried.
if you do all your sorting on server and use imap, you *might not* have a problem. i can not comment what happens when running imap, as i use pop3 and have not tested the corruption problem with imap.
as near as i can tell, corruption is caused by emails entering the Inbox and then filters moving them out.
i am making a presumption that emails reside for a short period in the Inbox while the filter is run and then moved out and file size is set back to zero when it is cleaned of filtered email.
reason i used word 'presumption' is because i use kde and when viewing account's Inbox file size, i use <f5> to refresh konqueror's view and it is difficult to see if Inbox file size increases. for sure, when thunderbird is finished retrieving emails, the time stamp is updated. so, i therefore use word 'presumption'.
thinking about this now, i imagine i could try to locate the source code for thunderbird and look up just what is happening. or i could subscribe to developers list and ask there. then hope that they give me an answer.
I don't think I enabled auto-compact manually, I don't know if its enabled by default, time to find out I guess.
it is best not to. not so much because it is a potential cause for problems. more like if you are moving emails to other files and later find you have email/s missing, you can open file were they were and reset the delete/moved bit and recover lost email.
This one I got covered, I maintain an "inbox zero" policy with all my accounts, mails are filtered directly without ever seeing my "INBOX" folder.
which you do by using imap and depending on server not to screw things up for you. :)
This is the thing, I don't use Thunderbird's filter system at all. All my filtering is done server side by a Dovecot plugin called Sieve as I mentioned. This is useful as I use Thunderbird on multiple devices and OSes and I don't have to bother to keep my filters in sync. Also I get to write filters in my favourite editor which is great too. :)
yes, thunderbird's filter was written more for oos user than for a linux user. one of several things i do not like about thunderbird's filter is that you can not "if (w or y) and (x or z)" nor can you "if (w and y) or (x and z)". the simple "if and" or "if or" is very limiting.
I am not too worried about losing e-mails due to corruption as this is essentially my mailing list e-mail and most if not all of them are publicly archived. :)
i look at loss from corruption not so much as a problem, as it is what you have to do and time spent in recovering what is.
"an ounce of prevention" applies to more than trojan. ;)
Noted. Thanks for your elaboration.
not a problem.
in closing, please excuse my delay in replying. i have been tied up with trying to correct an email problem that turned out to be related to yuckahoo and their server's spam filter.
later.
On 01/16/2013 04:47 PM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote: <>
So just to clarify for someone like me.....who has a three sub-folders under my GMail account running on TB. You're saying I should move those folders to the "Local Folder" on my computer and away from under the Inbox for GMail? I have filters set up in TB that send certain e-mail addresses to those folders.....will the filters still work when I move them? (I have folders for the Fedora Users Group....the CEntOS Users Group...and the Scientific Linux Users Group!) Just want to know before I go and move them
i presume you are addressing your question to me, so i reply with;
also read my reply to "staticsafe".
*no* *email folder* should be placed under another _email_folder_. especially if the parent email folder is an Inbox.
if you do not want an 'email folder' to reside at same level as your account's Inbox, you should create a *parent folder* and then move 'email folders' below it. *do not* store emails in the _parent_folder_.
if you drag and drop a thunderbird 'email folders' to a new place, any filter associated with that 'email folder' will be re-written by thunderbird. you should also get a notice window telling you that the filter is re-written.
as they sit on your hard drive, *email folders* are _files_. *parent folders* are _directories_.
*parent folders* will show as "parentname.sbd" and there will be 2 associated files "parentname" and "parentname.msf".
*email folders* files will show as "emailfolder" and "emailfolder.msf".
open up a file browser and look at just how things are laid out under the *Mail* directory in your profile directory; |/ /Home/username/.thunderbird/????????.default/Mail/ yourname 8 alpha/numeric
also these same folders are also existent on the GMail servers, will my moving the ones on TB affect those as well?...
when you move thunderbird email folders and parent folders on your system, i can not say what will happen on server if you are using imap and if it ties back to server.
if using pop3, no.
On 01/16/2013 05:01 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: <>
I use Gmail (in IMAP mode)
question to an IMAP user.
how does folder moving tie in between server and client?
which tree structure is reflected to the other?
it has been over 30 years from when i last set up an IMAP account and i do not recall how it works.
Am 18.01.2013 22:05, schrieb g:
how does folder moving tie in between server and client?
switch to another folder and back if IDLE push does not refresh enough for you
which tree structure is reflected to the other?
uhm?
the whole structure is on the server as also the mails there is no "the other" at all
On 01/18/2013 03:18 PM, g wrote:
On 01/15/2013 04:47 AM, staticsafe wrote: <>
OK, now I'm worried.
if you do all your sorting on server and use imap, you *might not* have a problem. i can not comment what happens when running imap, as i use pop3 and have not tested the corruption problem with imap.
as near as i can tell, corruption is caused by emails entering the Inbox and then filters moving them out.
i am making a presumption that emails reside for a short period in the Inbox while the filter is run and then moved out and file size is set back to zero when it is cleaned of filtered email.
reason i used word 'presumption' is because i use kde and when viewing account's Inbox file size, i use <f5> to refresh konqueror's view and it is difficult to see if Inbox file size increases. for sure, when thunderbird is finished retrieving emails, the time stamp is updated. so, i therefore use word 'presumption'.
thinking about this now, i imagine i could try to locate the source code for thunderbird and look up just what is happening. or i could subscribe to developers list and ask there. then hope that they give me an answer.
I don't think I enabled auto-compact manually, I don't know if its enabled by default, time to find out I guess.
it is best not to. not so much because it is a potential cause for problems. more like if you are moving emails to other files and later find you have email/s missing, you can open file were they were and reset the delete/moved bit and recover lost email.
This one I got covered, I maintain an "inbox zero" policy with all my accounts, mails are filtered directly without ever seeing my "INBOX" folder.
which you do by using imap and depending on server not to screw things up for you. :)
This is the thing, I don't use Thunderbird's filter system at all. All my filtering is done server side by a Dovecot plugin called Sieve as I mentioned. This is useful as I use Thunderbird on multiple devices and OSes and I don't have to bother to keep my filters in sync. Also I get to write filters in my favourite editor which is great too. :)
yes, thunderbird's filter was written more for oos user than for a linux user. one of several things i do not like about thunderbird's filter is that you can not "if (w or y) and (x or z)" nor can you "if (w and y) or (x and z)". the simple "if and" or "if or" is very limiting.
I am not too worried about losing e-mails due to corruption as this is essentially my mailing list e-mail and most if not all of them are publicly archived. :)
i look at loss from corruption not so much as a problem, as it is what you have to do and time spent in recovering what is.
"an ounce of prevention" applies to more than trojan. ;)
Noted. Thanks for your elaboration.
not a problem.
in closing, please excuse my delay in replying. i have been tied up with trying to correct an email problem that turned out to be related to yuckahoo and their server's spam filter.
later.
Well thank you SO much for clearing that up for me....I'm in the process of moving ALL my "child" folders from the Inbox...and placing them on my local hard drive!....
EGO II
On 01/18/2013 03:59 PM, g wrote:
On 01/16/2013 04:47 PM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote: <>
So just to clarify for someone like me.....who has a three sub-folders under my GMail account running on TB. You're saying I should move those folders to the "Local Folder" on my computer and away from under the Inbox for GMail? I have filters set up in TB that send certain e-mail addresses to those folders.....will the filters still work when I move them? (I have folders for the Fedora Users Group....the CEntOS Users Group...and the Scientific Linux Users Group!) Just want to know before I go and move them
i presume you are addressing your question to me, so i reply with;
also read my reply to "staticsafe".
*no* *email folder* should be placed under another _email_folder_. especially if the parent email folder is an Inbox.
if you do not want an 'email folder' to reside at same level as your account's Inbox, you should create a *parent folder* and then move 'email folders' below it. *do not* store emails in the _parent_folder_.
if you drag and drop a thunderbird 'email folders' to a new place, any filter associated with that 'email folder' will be re-written by thunderbird. you should also get a notice window telling you that the filter is re-written.
as they sit on your hard drive, *email folders* are _files_. *parent folders* are _directories_.
*parent folders* will show as "parentname.sbd" and there will be 2 associated files "parentname" and "parentname.msf".
*email folders* files will show as "emailfolder" and "emailfolder.msf".
open up a file browser and look at just how things are laid out under the *Mail* directory in your profile directory; |/ /Home/username/.thunderbird/????????.default/Mail/ yourname 8 alpha/numeric
also these same folders are also existent on the GMail servers, will my moving the ones on TB affect those as well?...
when you move thunderbird email folders and parent folders on your system, i can not say what will happen on server if you are using imap and if it ties back to server.
if using pop3, no.
Thanks for this important info!....
EGO II
On 01/19/2013 04:03 AM, Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. wrote: <<>>
Well thank you SO much for clearing that up for me....I'm in the process of moving ALL my "child" folders from the Inbox...and placing them on my local hard drive!....
again, you are welcome and i am glad to help.
for no more than what is involved, even tho you have had no problems, you will be safer not taking any chances.
with the way thunderbird authors are, you never know if and when they will make drastic changes to code and what it may do to your system.
with no 'children' under Inbox, you cyoa.
also, i suggest not to put 'children' under any folder that receives or holds any email. it is too easy to create empty 'parent' folders.
On 01/18/2013 09:15 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 18.01.2013 22:05, schrieb g:
how does folder moving tie in between server and client?
switch to another folder and back if IDLE push does not refresh enough for you
"IDLE push"?
which tree structure is reflected to the other?
uhm?
the whole structure is on the server as also the mails there is no "the other" at all
in other words, email client reflects what is on server and email client user does not have to build structure in client?
emails are on server because it is the server. but as i recall, they are downloaded to client and deleted from server if so configured.
years ago, when i was using imap, i filtered on my client, not on server.
Am 20.01.2013 15:38, schrieb g:
On 01/18/2013 09:15 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 18.01.2013 22:05, schrieb g:
how does folder moving tie in between server and client?
switch to another folder and back if IDLE push does not refresh enough for you
"IDLE push"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMAP_IDLE
which tree structure is reflected to the other?
uhm?
the whole structure is on the server as also the mails there is no "the other" at all
in other words, email client reflects what is on server and email client user does not have to build structure in client?
he can not build structure on the client anything you do happens on the server
emails are on server because it is the server. but as i recall, they are downloaded to client and deleted from server if so configured.
please google the dfiffernce ebtween IMAP and POP3
years ago, when i was using imap, i filtered on my client, not on server.
surely, you can configure your client to move around messages between folders like for local ones, but that would be a dumb solution if your server supports sieve because if you are on a different client like smartphone and your client with the filters has to run the whole time or no filtering
it is much more effective filter messages in folders via sieve on the server which affects any client everywhere and saves bandwith - usually filtering in the client is copy the message to the destination folder and remove it after that from the old one, this is not fast, no efficient and wasting bandwith and last but not least makes all the troubles with the thunderbird indexes especially if different clients are connected at the same time
maybe you should consider reading wikipedia and references how IMAP works because your questions are showing you missed it
On 01/20/2013 03:18 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: <>
good link. thank you.
<>
he can not build structure on the client anything you do happens on the server
not quit true. i could build a tree on server and then add branches in thunderbird to do do further filtering.
<>
please google the dfiffernce ebtween IMAP and POP3
i admit i do not have a full understanding of current day imap, but i do have an awareness of diff between imap and pop3.
<>
surely, you can configure your client to move around messages between folders like for local ones, but that would be a dumb solution if your server supports sieve because if you are on a different client like smartphone and your client with the filters has to run the whole time or no filtering
no. what is dumb is taking for granted that all servers use/support sieve, and being that i am talking about late 80's into 90's, before sieve, my doing what i did was not dumb. :)
being that one of great advantages of imap is doing _pre_ filtering at server allows one to download emails to various systems and then further filter for needs of other systems.
to give you a better understanding, i played with computers when they where run with punched cards. which is not counting the relay operated tic-tac-toe system at museum of science in chicago. :)
shortly after zilog was formed, i built my first micro cpu system using zilog z80 and s100 buss. and yes, i used 8" floppies.
it is much more effective filter messages in folders via sieve on the server which affects any client everywhere and saves bandwith - usually filtering in the client is copy the message to the destination folder and remove it after that from the old one, this is not fast, no efficient and wasting bandwith and last but not least makes all the troubles with the thunderbird indexes especially if different clients are connected at the same time
basic filtering is, may be, more effective on server in some cases. all/every client may not have need or use of all email that is handled on server. ie, bookkeeping/accounting would not have need for emails that go to an engineering dept. and many more examples, too many to mention them and would be a waste of bandwidth. ;)
which is all where there are advantages of using thunderbird
maybe you should consider reading wikipedia and references how IMAP works because your questions are showing you missed it
some of it, yes. a lot has changed in last 30 years. when i find time i do plan to read up on what has happened in that time to imap. but it will not be at wikipedia. i enjoy reading rfc's.
i do thank you for your replies.
On Sun, 2013-01-20 at 14:38 +0000, g wrote:
On 01/18/2013 09:15 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 18.01.2013 22:05, schrieb g:
how does folder moving tie in between server and client?
switch to another folder and back if IDLE push does not refresh enough for you
"IDLE push"?
which tree structure is reflected to the other?
uhm?
the whole structure is on the server as also the mails there is no "the other" at all
in other words, email client reflects what is on server and email client user does not have to build structure in client?
By default no. The client can of course have its own folder structure, but the two are entirely independent. Many clients also allow caching of server folders locally (usually on a per-folder basis).
emails are on server because it is the server. but as i recall, they are downloaded to client and deleted from server if so configured.
I don't know of any client that does that. You may be thinking of POP, which is entirely different. The whole point of IMAP is to keep the master copy on the server where it's accessible from anywhere, and use local copies only as a cache.
years ago, when i was using imap, i filtered on my client, not on server.
That's because standardized server-side filtering never really got going and isn't well-supported by any widely-used client. However in this case we're specifically talking about Gmail, not about some random IMAP server. Although the Gmail implementation of IMAP is slightly quirky, the server-side filtering is effective. The only thing is you have to set it up via the web interface.
poc
Patrick O'Callaghan writes:
On Sun, 2013-01-20 at 14:38 +0000, g wrote:
On 01/18/2013 09:15 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
which tree structure is reflected to the other?
uhm?
the whole structure is on the server as also the mails there is no "the other" at all
in other words, email client reflects what is on server and email client user does not have to build structure in client?
By default no. The client can of course have its own folder structure, but the two are entirely independent. Many clients also allow caching of server folders locally (usually on a per-folder basis).
IMAP is schizophrenic. On one hand, it's general design seems to be oriented towards letting clients cache server mail content.
But on the other hand, IMAP does several things that make reliable caching of mail content pretty much impossible. This is why, in general, IMAP clients over the years have been crap.
IMAP IDLE has been mentioned here. IDLE is a piggy-back extension. It's not part of the base protocol. Clients cannot assume the server supports it. Therefore, IMAP clients have to support the case of IDLE not being available, and there are servers that do not implement it.
Here's the problem. Not just with IMAP, but with any other kind of a client/server protocol with optional bits that are glued on as an afterthought. It takes a certain amount of effort to implement anything. Therefore, faced with the option of implementing and supporting just the base minimum, versus the base minimum and some optional bits, and then having the overhead of supporting multiple ways of accomplishing the same task, in perpetuity, you can pretty much draw your own conclusion as to how this is going to play out in the long run.
emails are on server because it is the server. but as i recall, they are downloaded to client and deleted from server if so configured.
I don't know of any client that does that. You may be thinking of POP, which is entirely different. The whole point of IMAP is to keep the master copy on the server where it's accessible from anywhere, and use local copies only as a cache.
Unfortutunately, as I mentioned, IMAP makes it pretty much impossible to implement this reliably, and efficiently. IDLE lets the client synchronize itself with the server only while it is connected to it. But, IDLE has nothing that lets the client synchronize itself with the server after it goes offline, then get reconnected later.
After connecting and opening a folder, an IMAP client has no efficient means of synchronizing its cache of the folder's content with what's on the server right now. The IMAP client has no means of determining a precise list of changes to the mailbox on the server since the IMAP client was logged on last time. There are several kinds of changes that the IMAP client /can/ quickly square away, but the protocol does not support actual syncing. It's not possible. IMAP is not designed for it.
I could get into the history of IMAP, how it came out, and the political reasons for that, but having my two remaining wisdom teeth pulled out would probably be a more pleasant experience.
years ago, when i was using imap, i filtered on my client, not on server.
That's because standardized server-side filtering never really got going and isn't well-supported by any widely-used client.
And, it's highly unlikely that it ever will.
Am 20.01.2013 22:08, schrieb Sam Varshavchik:
years ago, when i was using imap, i filtered on my client, not on server.
That's because standardized server-side filtering never really got going and isn't well-supported by any widely-used client.
And, it's highly unlikely that it ever will
says the developer of courier-imap ignoring that most people these days are using dovecot or gmail and even niche-systems like dbmail supports sieve since years
Sam Varshavchik — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:15:03 +0000 (UTC)
Sieve is both a client-side and a server-side filtering mechanism. Courier-IMAP does not implement sieve on the server side, and there are no plans to do so. There should not be any issues using an IMAP client that implements Sieve with Courier, that would be no different than using the same IMAP client with any other IMAP server.
Reindl Harald writes:
Am 20.01.2013 22:08, schrieb Sam Varshavchik:
years ago, when i was using imap, i filtered on my client, not on server.
That's because standardized server-side filtering never really got going and isn't well-supported by any widely-used client.
And, it's highly unlikely that it ever will
says the developer of courier-imap ignoring that most people these days are using dovecot or gmail and even niche-systems like dbmail supports sieve since years
Which standalone email clients can be used to adjust gmail's server-side filters?
Forget even that – which standalone, relatively common, email clients can even support server-side sieve filters? Or, even have a clue what sieve is?
I'm fully willing to consider the possibility that there are a plethora of sieve-supporting email clients out there that I just don't know about it.
But, for some reason, I don't think that to be the case. There are some email clients that might support sieve, I suppose. But I'd be shocked if, in the entire pool of email clients, they're more than statistical noise.
Am 20.01.2013 22:48, schrieb Sam Varshavchik:
And, it's highly unlikely that it ever will
says the developer of courier-imap ignoring that most people these days are using dovecot or gmail and even niche-systems like dbmail supports sieve since years
Which standalone email clients can be used to adjust gmail's server-side filters?
does not matter, gmail is mostly used via http and that said even if i never use http crap
Forget even that – which standalone, relatively common, email clients can even support server-side sieve filters? Or, even have a clue what sieve is?
I'm fully willing to consider the possibility that there are a plethora of sieve-supporting email clients out there that I just don't know about it.
But, for some reason, I don't think that to be the case. There are some email clients that might support sieve, I suppose. But I'd be shocked if, in the entire pool of email clients, they're more than statistical noise.
https://addons.mozilla.org/de/thunderbird/addon/sieve/ used since many years here
the problem is that there are too many servers to supporting sieve so why should someone add it as default for the clients and you are one of the server-side developers not interested
Reindl Harald writes:
I'm fully willing to consider the possibility that there are a plethora of
sieve-supporting email clients out there
that I just don't know about it.
But, for some reason, I don't think that to be the case. There are some
email clients that might support sieve, I
suppose. But I'd be shocked if, in the entire pool of email clients,
they're more than statistical noise.
https://addons.mozilla.org/de/thunderbird/addon/sieve/ used since many years here
Sure there's a Thunderbird extension, but how many people know or care about it? Right now, Thunderbird shows that this extension has been downloaded only 37182 times. It's not clear to me whether that's the lifetime of the extension, or just for the latest version.
Even if it's only the latest version, which was posted three months ago, you have to admit, this is insignificant. And, Thunderbird is the most visible client listed on Sieve's page.
the problem is that there are too many servers to supporting sieve so why should someone add it as default for the clients and you are one of the server-side developers not interested
I'm not sure I follow your logic. According to the description of the Thunderbird extension, the extension is not a client-side implementation, but it manages Sieve on the server side.
If that were the case, and Sieve's mind-share on the server side was, indeed, as much as you suggest, I would've thought that Sieve's server- side's popularity would translate to a much higher download rate.
As far as Courier-IMAP goes, I don't recall anyone offering a patch, and me capriciously rejecting it. I certainly don't have any particular interest in working on Sieve myself, at this time. But that doesn't mean that, at some point in the future, that won't change, or that I'll ignore someone's well- written Sieve code. The authpipe module in courier-authlib was written by someone else. I did not have, and have no interest right now, in anything like that, but so what.
-
EGO-II.1 -
g -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Reindl Harald -
Sam Varshavchik -
staticsafe