[Dovecot] Webmail Recommendation
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Thanks
Peter Sparkes
Peter Sparkes wrote:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Not perfect, but great: http://www.roundcube.net. /L
Hi Peter,
Peter Sparkes pisze:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Squirrel Mail is very fast and has a lot of plug-ins. http://www.squirrelmail.org/
RoundCube looks very nice and has drag and drop feature but it is a tad slower when comparing to SM. http://www.roundcube.net/
There are many others, but these two I have tried.
Kind regards,
Zbigniew Szalbot
zbigniew szalbot skrev:
Hi Peter,
Peter Sparkes pisze:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Squirrel Mail is very fast and has a lot of plug-ins. http://www.squirrelmail.org/
RoundCube looks very nice and has drag and drop feature but it is a tad slower when comparing to SM. http://www.roundcube.net/
There are many others, but these two I have tried.
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP. Running a web application available to the whole wide internet written in PHP is just asking for someone to break into your systems.
I _really_ _really_ wish someone would write a nice webmail system in some other language... Like a Ruby-on-Rails one (I've found a few, but they aren't actively maintained anymore).
- Peter
On Do 10 Jan 2008 08:17:15p Peter Eriksson wrote:
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP.
Hi,
you could try NeoMail, written in Perl.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/neomail
Bernd
Hello Peter,
Thursday, January 10, 2008, 8:17:15 PM, you wrote:
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP. Running a web application available to the whole wide internet written in PHP is just asking for someone to break into your systems.
That's pretty much off-topic but for anyone interested just in web mail systems and less so in holy wars & stuff: don't worry, it is not that bad. It is not bad at all, actually :)
I _really_ _really_ wish someone would write a nice webmail system in some other language... Like a Ruby-on-Rails one (I've found a few, but they aren't actively maintained anymore).
Hadn't you mentioned specifically RoR (or any other of the buzzwords/ newcomings) I'd have taken your opinion as a warning (aggresively voiced, but still a warning about security -- a useful thing to have).
What you've written, however, is pretty unbalanced. You made it difficult to consider it 'useful' or 'informative'. It is more of misinformation than information.
But let's not discuss it here, it's Dovecot list.
Robert Tomanek wrote:
Hello Peter,
Thursday, January 10, 2008, 8:17:15 PM, you wrote:
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP. Running a web application available to the whole wide internet written in PHP is just asking for someone to break into your systems.
That's pretty much off-topic but for anyone interested just in web mail systems and less so in holy wars & stuff: don't worry, it is not that bad. It is not bad at all, actually :)
OK, let's try to get a bit more on topic and go back to the original question of what's a good webmail client for Dovecot?
We went with Prayer Webmail (written by the University of Cambridge) as it's killer feature was *persistent* IMAP connections.
This mattered hugely when we were using UW-IMAP and opening a mailbox was very expensive in resources. Most of the PHP-based clients such as Squirrelmail are fairly efficient, but still essentially open a new connection for each message read. Some other webmail clients use POP3 (yuck!)
With Dovecot's caching and indexing, things are much better, but there is still a significant overhead on opening lots of connections, I fear, especially for mboxes (moving to maildir would help of course). I would consider using imapproxy (designed to assist with this problem by caching the IMAP connections) but I'm not sure whether it would help significantly.
(Back off topic again :) - Roundcube is an "Ajax" application, which potentially introduces a new class of vulnerabilities. Prayer has a pretty old-fashioned interface, but is written entirely in C and is very efficient in its use of resources. It's probably vulnerable to stored cross-site scripting though, and is no longer actively maintained. Cambridge are now using Cyrus IMAP and are thinking of IMP or Squirrelmail, I think.)
Chris
OK, let's try to get a bit more on topic and go back to the original
question of what's a good webmail client for Dovecot?We went with Prayer Webmail (written by the University of Cambridge)
as it's killer feature was *persistent* IMAP connections.
Persistence is a total win for webmail. It's among the issues I had
with everything written in PHP.
So I wrote my own. http://dinhe.net/~aredridel/projects/ruby/camping-at-the-mailbox
It uses the ruby "Camping" framework, and runs as its own daemon or
fastcgi process.
It's working relatively well, and has a sparse, low-fi but pretty
usable interface.
I'm actively taking patches, too, and am interested in grafting on an
AJAX-additional interface.
Aria
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 15:19 -0700, Aria Stewart wrote:
OK, let's try to get a bit more on topic and go back to the original
question of what's a good webmail client for Dovecot?We went with Prayer Webmail (written by the University of Cambridge)
as it's killer feature was *persistent* IMAP connections.Persistence is a total win for webmail. It's among the issues I had
with everything written in PHP.
Right. I've also thought about writing a webmail some day because most of them use non-persistent connections. But maybe not if a usable persistent webmail pops up. :) I was thinking about keeping most of the more complex logic in a Dovecot webmail-plugin and have the actual web interface be pretty dummy.
No-one mentioned WebAlpine yet, which also uses persistent connections. I haven't tried it myself though.
So I wrote my own. http://dinhe.net/~aredridel/projects/ruby/camping-at-the-mailbox
Missing screenshots. :)
On 1/10/2008, Timo Sirainen (tss@iki.fi) wrote:
No-one mentioned WebAlpine yet, which also uses persistent connections. I haven't tried it myself though.
I though this is what imapproxy did for webmail? We only have one or two people who actually use ours (Squirrelmail), so it isn't an issue on our dual opteron server, but I've thought about installing it anyway...
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 1/10/2008, Timo Sirainen (tss@iki.fi) wrote:
No-one mentioned WebAlpine yet, which also uses persistent connections. I haven't tried it myself though.
I though this is what imapproxy did for webmail? We only have one or two people who actually use ours (Squirrelmail), so it isn't an issue on our dual opteron server, but I've thought about installing it anyway...
Last time I looked at it, imapproxy cached authentication (but so can Dovecot!) but not SELECTs (i.e. opening a mailbox), which is why I wondered how useful it would be.
(BTW www.imapproxy.org doesn't seem to be working at the moment, but the mailing-list archives are at http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/imapproxy-info/)
Chris
- Chris Wakelin c.d.wakelin@reading.ac.uk:
Last time I looked at it, imapproxy cached authentication (but so can Dovecot!) but not SELECTs (i.e. opening a mailbox), which is why I wondered how useful it would be.
## enable_select_cache ## ## This configuration option allows you to turn select caching on or off. ## When select caching is enabled, up-imapproxy will cache SELECT responses ## from an imap server. # enable_select_cache yes
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 13:36 +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
- Chris Wakelin c.d.wakelin@reading.ac.uk:
Last time I looked at it, imapproxy cached authentication (but so can Dovecot!) but not SELECTs (i.e. opening a mailbox), which is why I wondered how useful it would be.
## enable_select_cache ## ## This configuration option allows you to turn select caching on or off. ## When select caching is enabled, up-imapproxy will cache SELECT responses ## from an imap server. # enable_select_cache yes
I looked at this code 3 years ago, don't know if it's been changed:
"I'd also advise against using it's SELECT-cache feature (disabled by default), since its design is fundementally broken. It may cause random problems with clients if the same mailbox is opened by multiple clients, or if the mailbox is modified behind up-imapproxy."
On Jan 11, 2008, at 4:50 AM, Chris Wakelin wrote:
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 1/10/2008, Timo Sirainen (tss@iki.fi) wrote:
No-one mentioned WebAlpine yet, which also uses persistent
connections. I haven't tried it myself though.I though this is what imapproxy did for webmail? We only have one
or two people who actually use ours (Squirrelmail), so it isn't an
issue on our dual opteron server, but I've thought about installing
it anyway...Last time I looked at it, imapproxy cached authentication (but so
can Dovecot!) but not SELECTs (i.e. opening a mailbox), which is why
I wondered how useful it would be.
It's not all its cracked up to be. Honestly, a webmail client that
truly takes advantage of IMAP's features is a stronger win.
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 06:42 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 1/10/2008, Timo Sirainen (tss@iki.fi) wrote:
No-one mentioned WebAlpine yet, which also uses persistent connections. I haven't tried it myself though.
I though this is what imapproxy did for webmail?
It makes connections look persistent to Dovecot, but it still forgets about its internal state, so it asks everything over and over again all the time. For example:
<request 1> 1 LIST "" * 2 SELECT INBOX 3 FETCH ..stuff.. <request 2> 1 LIST "" * 2 SELECT INBOX 3 FETCH ..hopefully at least other stuff..
And perhaps more importantly, clients with persistent connections and persistent state can use IDLE (or even NOOP) to update its state about new mails, instead of polling them by using commands like "UID SEARCH ALL" or "FETCH 1:* UID".
Timo Sirainen, on 1/11/2008 6:54 AM, said the following:
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 06:42 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 1/10/2008, Timo Sirainen (tss@iki.fi) wrote:
No-one mentioned WebAlpine yet, which also uses persistent connections. I haven't tried it myself though.
I though this is what imapproxy did for webmail?
It makes connections look persistent to Dovecot, but it still forgets about its internal state, so it asks everything over and over again all the time. For example:
<snip>
Ahh... ok, thanks for the precise and informative explanation... :)
Il giorno ven, 11/01/2008 alle 06.16 +0200, Timo Sirainen ha scritto:
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 15:19 -0700, Aria Stewart wrote:
OK, let's try to get a bit more on topic and go back to the original
question of what's a good webmail client for Dovecot?We went with Prayer Webmail (written by the University of Cambridge)
as it's killer feature was *persistent* IMAP connections.Persistence is a total win for webmail. It's among the issues I had
with everything written in PHP.
I use http://freshmeat.net/projects/imapproxy/ for that. works fine.
Marcello Nuccio
On Jan 11, 2008 11:51 AM, Marcello Nuccio marcello.nuccio@gmail.com wrote:
I use http://freshmeat.net/projects/imapproxy/ for that. works fine.
Agreed, its instant drop in persistence a must have.
On Jan 10, 2008, at 9:16 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
So I wrote my own. http://dinhe.net/~aredridel/projects/ruby/camping-at-the-mailbox
Missing screenshots. :)
http://dinhe.net/~aredridel/projects/ruby/camping-at-the-mailbox-screenshots
Cheers!
- Chris Wakelin c.d.wakelin@reading.ac.uk:
With Dovecot's caching and indexing, things are much better, but there is still a significant overhead on opening lots of connections, I fear, especially for mboxes (moving to maildir would help of course). I would consider using imapproxy (designed to assist with this problem by caching the IMAP connections) but I'm not sure whether it would help significantly.
It helps a lot.
Greetings -
On 10 Jan 2008, at 21:49, Chris Wakelin wrote:
With Dovecot's caching and indexing, things are much better, but
there is still a significant overhead on opening lots of
connections, I fear, especially for mboxes (moving to maildir would
help of course). I would consider using imapproxy (designed to
assist with this problem by caching the IMAP connections) but I'm
not sure whether it would help significantly.
Whatever you do, DON'T move to Maildir if you are using the Prayer
webmail software!
We have used Prayer here for many years with the UW IMAP server
backend and first Berkeley, then later MBX, format mail folders.
When we migrated new users to Dovecoe with Maildir folders we
discovered that Prayer does NOT like Maildir folders. The reason is
that Maildir folders are "dual-purpose": each can contain any mix of
messages and sub-folders. However Prayer is intrinsically designed to
ONLY work with folders that can contain messages or subfolders, but
NOT both. The result is that Prayer can show you the list of folders
to navigate around, but will not list any messages within any folder.
I checked with Cambridge and this is a known and documented
restriction with Prayer. Their solution has been to hack Cyrus to
prevent dual-use folders. (Timo kindly supplied us with a patch for
Dovecot 1.0.x to do likewise.)
We are thinking about moving to a different webmail platform soon, so
I am following this discussion with interest.
I can confirm that webmail software that uses persistent IMAP
connections is a big win: it not only lightens load on the webmail
server machine but also, more importantly, on the IMAP servers.
Cheers, Mike B-)
Mike Brudenell wrote:
Whatever you do, DON'T move to Maildir if you are using the Prayer webmail software!
We have used Prayer here for many years with the UW IMAP server backend and first Berkeley, then later MBX, format mail folders.
When we migrated new users to Dovecoe with Maildir folders we discovered that Prayer does NOT like Maildir folders. The reason is that Maildir folders are "dual-purpose": each can contain any mix of messages and sub-folders. However Prayer is intrinsically designed to ONLY work with folders that can contain messages or subfolders, but NOT both. The result is that Prayer can show you the list of folders to navigate around, but will not list any messages within any folder.
I had to hack Prayer to cope with users we'd migrated to <cough>Exchange</cough> that were being proxied through Dovecot so that they didn't need to change their mail client settings. (Exchange was marking folders as "HASNOCHILDREN" rather than "HASNOINFERIORS" and would put a trailing "/" on a non-selectable directory.)
I'm not sure whether it would be Dovecot or Prayer I'd modify to deal with Maildirs!
Chris
On 1/11/2008, Mike Brudenell (pmb1@york.ac.uk) wrote:
I can confirm that webmail software that uses persistent IMAP connections is a big win: it not only lightens load on the webmail server machine but also, more importantly, on the IMAP servers.
It doesn't come out and say one way or another, but it *appears* that roundcube may use persistent connections...
Here are a couple of interesting ones I just stumbled on googling:
http://decimail.org/webmail/index
http://sourceforge.net/projects/alphamail
On fredagen den 11 januari 2008, Mike Brudenell wrote:
Whatever you do, DON'T move to Maildir if you are using the Prayer webmail software!
We have used Prayer here for many years with the UW IMAP server backend and first Berkeley, then later MBX, format mail folders.
When we migrated new users to Dovecoe with Maildir folders we discovered that Prayer does NOT like Maildir folders. The reason is that Maildir folders are "dual-purpose": each can contain any mix of messages and sub-folders. However Prayer is intrinsically designed to ONLY work with folders that can contain messages or subfolders, but NOT both.
The author of Prayer has (partly thanks to my patches adding UTF-8 and IPv6 support) recently released version 1.1.0 of Prayer which supports dual-use folders out of the box.
Hi folks,
I'd like to throw in some real world experience: my IMAP server runs for just a few users, but they have huge maildirs (>1GB each) with hundreds of folders and, in some folders, thousands of messages.
Before switching to dovecot, courier-imap handled the backend and I used Squirrelmail as the front-end.
imapproxy had a huge (positive) impact on performance, especially when browsing through folders with many messages. Startup (building the maildir tree with message counts) still took its time, and searching in Squirrelmail also was a pain.
Thanks to Dovecot, startup and search (in from/to, subject) now is really fast and I turned off imapproxy completely as it did not further improve the webmail's performance. I guess in environments where authentication is expensive (slow) imapproxy sure is worth a look at.
Best regards
-hannes
On Friday, January 11 at 01:21 PM, quoth Hannes Erven:
Before switching to dovecot, courier-imap handled the backend and I used Squirrelmail as the front-end.
We used to use BincIMAP and Squirrelmail.
imapproxy had a huge (positive) impact on performance, especially when browsing through folders with many messages. Startup (building the maildir tree with message counts) still took its time, and searching in Squirrelmail also was a pain.
We had the same experience.
Thanks to Dovecot, startup and search (in from/to, subject) now is really fast and I turned off imapproxy completely as it did not further improve the webmail's performance. I guess in environments where authentication is expensive (slow) imapproxy sure is worth a look at.
We did the same, for the same reasons. Dovecot offered an order of magnitude increase (subjective) in responsiveness, and I couldn't tell the difference between using imapproxy and not using imapproxy---we removed it just to reduce the complexity of the system.
~Kyle
There in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionist and rebel men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Peter Eriksson wrote:
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP. Running a web application available to the whole wide internet written in PHP is just asking for someone to break into your systems.
You beat me to it. I was just about to post asking for someone to recommend one NOT written in PHP.
I _really_ _really_ wish someone would write a nice webmail system in some other language... Like a Ruby-on-Rails one (I've found a few, but they aren't actively maintained anymore).
A friend has started writing a Django-based webmail client. It's still very basic, but I see great potential. Especially as it's written in Python, and Django is a very powerful web app framework.
If anyone's interested in chipping in (even just running it and contributing ideas would help) give me a hoi.
Peter Eriksson wrote:
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP. Running a web application available to the whole wide internet written in PHP is just asking for someone to break into your systems.
This can be pretty easily solved - configure your web server to require HTTP authentication for the location where the PHP script is, configure the web server to use the same authentication source as webmail, and hack webmail to pick up the authentication from the web server instead of presenting a login prompt.
Pretty easy with apache and LDAP-based users, and squirrelmail at least...
But, if you don't do this, I totally agree.
Stephen Warren wrote:
Peter Eriksson wrote:
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP. Running a web application available to the whole wide internet written in PHP is just asking for someone to break into your systems.
This can be pretty easily solved - configure your web server to require HTTP authentication for the location where the PHP script is, configure the web server to use the same authentication source as webmail, and hack webmail to pick up the authentication from the web server instead of presenting a login prompt.
you also need to enforce strong passwords, because if an attacker can guess passwords, authentication doesn't help much.
In addition, this doesn't solve the problem for hosters, when users cannot be trusted.
Another measure is to enforce https.
That said, it is possible to implement secure applications in php and it is possible to implement unsecure applications in other languages. The fact that php is more widely used than say ruby certainly reduces the costs for attackers, but this doesn't mean that php is unsecure by itself. Also, if you want a "fancy" UI, you'll need javascript and this will bring its problems whatever primary language you use.
Pretty easy with apache and LDAP-based users, and squirrelmail at least...
But, if you don't do this, I totally agree.
On 1/10/2008, Stephen Warren (swarren@wwwdotorg.org) wrote:
This can be pretty easily solved - configure your web server to require HTTP authentication for the location where the PHP script is, configure the web server to use the same authentication source as webmail, and hack webmail to pick up the authentication from the web server instead of presenting a login prompt.
Pretty easy with apache and LDAP-based users, and squirrelmail at least...
So instead of loggin into squirrelmail, you log in through the Basic HTTP Auth pop-up?
On giovedì 10 gennaio 2008, Peter Eriksson wrote:
All the suggested ones have just one big FAT problem - they are all written in that security bug ridden language that the hackers just love to exploit - PHP. Running a web application available to the whole wide internet written in PHP is just asking for someone to break into your systems.
Oh my god! Never heard nothing more ... bah .. no words!
Not to flame, but please permit me to just point out some ideas:
- PHP is one of the many scripting languages
- PHP is oriented to web development (but not only)
- PHP (and PHP4 in particular) had is huge success thanks to its simplicity
and the lackness of strict type check and so on...
The last point is the glory and the pain of the language, as this makes unskylled people to rapidly develop in PHP *working* software...
yes, I said "working" software, that is not a good written, projected, hardened software!! Squirrelmail itself is (at least before the OOP recoding) very very poorly written...
Finally, the simple and unconfutable fact that a wide number of web server are exploited thanks to bad PHP script in *not* and intrinsic hole in the language, the are simple very very bad coded script/apps!!!
I can assure that writeing a secure PHP application is not a nightmare, is simply coding in a professional way.
The simple fact of using (using in a professional way, not just installing and coding !!!) a good Framework and ORM can already make the application SQL Injection free, more secure, portable and so on ...
My 2 cents
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4. Recommendations requested please.
Squirrel Mail is very fast and has a lot of plug-ins. http://www.squirrelmail.org/
there is also a forked version of squirrelmail called overlook that is worth checking out: http://www.openit.it/index.php/openit_en/software_libero/overlook
claros intouch is ajaxy and looks great (if you don't mind tomcat/servlet applications): http://claros.org/web/showProduct.do?id=1
Peter Sparkes wrote:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
RoundCube is nice, but development is slow http://roundcube.net/
@mail is very good, has optional user management module also. @mail is commercial but then again it is the best webmail I have seen sofar. http://atmail.com/
Tomi
On Jan 10, 2007 1:41 PM, Peter Sparkes peter@didm.co.uk wrote:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Thanks
Peter Sparkes
Try nasmail: http://www.nasmail.org/ instead of squirrelmail.
It has many working plugins and is actively maintained.
Gregory
Hello Peter,
Wednesday, January 10, 2007, 6:41:46 PM, you wrote:
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4. Recommendations requested please.
I can confirm RoundCube ( http://www.roundcube.net/ ) is a good recommendation. Don't get discouraged by the early beta version numbers, it is quite usable indeed. The focus is not on multitude of features but rather on general usability and interface sleekness. It looks good and it feels good. See for yourself.
It is very easy to install and configure.
On 1/10/2008, Robert Tomanek (dovecot@mail.robert.tomanek.org) wrote:
I can confirm RoundCube ( http://www.roundcube.net/ ) is a good recommendation.
Can you confirm that it uses persistent IMAP connections? I can't tell from the website or searching the mail archives or forum...
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 1/10/2008, Robert Tomanek (dovecot@mail.robert.tomanek.org) wrote:
I can confirm RoundCube ( http://www.roundcube.net/ ) is a good recommendation.
Can you confirm that it uses persistent IMAP connections? I can't tell from the website or searching the mail archives or forum...
In my limited testing with a recent SVN build (http://nightly.roundcube.net/trunk/roundcubemail-trunk-r938-20071210.tgz from Dec 10th), it doesn't use persistent connections, but apparently it does cache stuff in its MySQL database, which will help somewhat.
It *does* tell the user about new mail which is a nice feature that Prayer hasn't got!
Chris
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 11:59 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 1/10/2008, Robert Tomanek (dovecot@mail.robert.tomanek.org) wrote:
I can confirm RoundCube ( http://www.roundcube.net/ ) is a good recommendation.
Can you confirm that it uses persistent IMAP connections? I can't tell from the website or searching the mail archives or forum...
We have been testing roundcube for couple of weeks now and although it is simple, fast and "reasonably" structured internally, it is still too buggy for us (eg. problems with special characters in mails) or lacks important features (eg. like import/export functionality for address books) for a large scale deployment.
And we don't see persistent IMAP connections, but, as Chris noted already, it stores quite lot of meta information into its MySQL database, which reduces the burden on dovecot but again increases the burden on MySQL ...
We are also testing the webinterface that eGroupWare [1] provides and are very impressed by its completeness (sieve integration, message filters and much more).
Hi,
On 11/01/2008, Udo Rader udo.rader@bestsolution.at wrote:
We have been testing roundcube for couple of weeks now and although it is simple, fast and "reasonably" structured internally, it is still too buggy for us (eg. problems with special characters in mails) or lacks important features (eg. like import/export functionality for address books) for a large scale deployment.
I did actually write a little extension to RC mail myself about a month ago - which you could try. http://www.rmacd.com/downloads/howto/add-csv-to-roundcube.php
Kind regards, Ronald.
On Jan 12, 2008, at 6:18 AM, Ronald MacDonald wrote:
I did actually write a little extension to RC mail myself about a month ago - which you could try. http://www.rmacd.com/downloads/howto/add-csv-to-roundcube.php
Mr. McDonald,
I haven't investigated too deeply but I presume your patch requires a
bit of modification to apply to roundcubemail-0.1-rc2.
BTW, my kids just LOVE your burgers!
B. Bodger
Peter Sparkes wrote:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Thanks
Peter Sparkes
http://hastymail.sourceforge.net/
Hastymail is very light, fast and extremely easy to setup and maintain. I can highly recommend it.
Regards, Thomas
- Thomas Løcke, 2008-01-10 22:19
http://hastymail.sourceforge.net/
Hastymail is very light, fast and extremely easy to setup and maintain. I can highly recommend it.
Beware of the sorting bug, though:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1263979&gro...
Other than that, I can only second the recommendation. :-)
Thomas
=-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
- Thomas "ZlatkO" Zajic zlatko@gmx.at Linux-2.6.23 & Thunderbird-2.0 -
- "It is not easy to cut through a human head with a hacksaw." (M. C.) -
=-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
On 22:19:16 2008-01-10 Thomas Løcke thomas@loecke.dk wrote:
Peter Sparkes wrote:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Thanks
Peter Sparkes
http://hastymail.sourceforge.net/
Hastymail is very light, fast and extremely easy to setup and maintain. I can highly recommend it.
Seconded... It is a great simple webmail client and it's nearly how I'd like to have a console client as well :)
-- Andraž "ruskie" Levstik Source Mage GNU/Linux Games grimoire guru Geek/Hacker/Tinker
Be sure brain is in gear before engaging mouth.
Key id = F4C1F89C Key fingerprint = 6FF2 8F20 4C9D DB36 B5B6 F134 884D 72CC F4C1 F89C
Peter Sparkes wrote:
Hi,
I want to install webmail. I am using Dovecot with Exim4.
Recommendations requested please.
Currently the best webmailer is Horde
It has several components you could put together to get sieve scripting support, calendar etc.
It is the best webmailer I've found. You give it a try.
Thanks
Peter Sparkes
-- andreas
On giovedì 10 gennaio 2008, Andreas Schneider wrote:
It is the best webmailer I've found. You give it a try.
I do not agree sorry, I found horde a very huge collaboration framework and IMP (the hosrde webmail component) is too much bounded to the rest of the framework ... I think that if you need only a webmail horde is too much ...
.. moreover I found its UI too much hard to completely customize. There was not (at least when I tried it) a good MVC architecture.
The best would be to find a WM basedon a good modern MVC framework, such as (spoking about the PHP world) symfony of Zend FW).. but I don't know if such a kimera exists :)
I'll add Usermin (http://webmin.com/usermin.html) to the list, which is part of the webmin (http://webmin.com/) program. It's more than just a web based email client, but you can limit features that you don't want users to access.
Tim Alberts wrote:
I'll add Usermin (http://webmin.com/usermin.html) to the list, which is part of the webmin (http://webmin.com/) program. It's more than just a web based email client, but you can limit features that you don't want users to access.
Out of curiosity, I Yahood 'java mbox maildir' and found a nice list here:
http://java.sun.com/products/javamail/Third_Party.html
May have to look at some of these myself.
participants (32)
-
"Andraž 'ruskie' Levstik"
-
Andreas Schneider
-
Aria Stewart
-
Bernd Kuhls
-
Brendan Braybrook
-
Bruce Bodger
-
Charles Marcus
-
Chris Wakelin
-
Curtis Maloney
-
Emiliano Gabrielli (aka AlberT)
-
Gabriel Millerd
-
Gregory Mokhin
-
Hannes Erven
-
Kyle Wheeler
-
Lars Stavholm
-
Magnus Holmgren
-
Marcello Nuccio
-
Mike Brudenell
-
mouss
-
Peter Eriksson
-
Peter Sparkes
-
Ralf Hildebrandt
-
Robert Tomanek
-
Ronald MacDonald
-
Stephen Warren
-
Thomas Løcke
-
Thomas Zajic
-
Tim Alberts
-
Timo Sirainen
-
Tomi Hakala
-
Udo Rader
-
zbigniew szalbot