Re: [Dovecot] dovecot is confused about mail_location

25 Nov 2010 · *at all*


      Noel Butler noel.butler@ausics.net:
...
fetchmail is good, I use it for my 'more general` mailing lists account
which differs from this one, thats the one like linux kernel and bunch
of others that gets around 300 msgs plus a day, so of course I only skim
over them using pine :)
It's 14 years after I taught fetchmail to speak SMTP and I find people
still often fail to grok what that actually demonstrates. What it
means, I think, is that putting IMAP or POP in a MUA *at all* was
wrong, a historical mistake; it confuses transport-level issues with
user-agent-level stuff.
	<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>

Re: [Dovecot] dovecot is confused about mail_location

Eric Raymond

It's 14 years after I taught fetchmail to speak SMTP and I find people still often fail to grok what that actually demonstrates. What it means, I think, is that putting IMAP or POP in a MUA at all was wrong, a historical mistake; it confuses transport-level issues with user-agent-level stuff.

Re: [Dovecot] dovecot is confused about mail_location

Eric Raymond

It's 14 years after I taught fetchmail to speak SMTP and I find people still often fail to grok what that actually demonstrates. What it means, I think, is that putting IMAP or POP in a MUA *at all* was wrong, a historical mistake; it confuses transport-level issues with user-agent-level stuff.

It's 14 years after I taught fetchmail to speak SMTP and I find people still often fail to grok what that actually demonstrates. What it means, I think, is that putting IMAP or POP in a MUA at all was wrong, a historical mistake; it confuses transport-level issues with user-agent-level stuff.