From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/70697 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Steinar Bang Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: That newfangled IMAP thing... Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:55:00 +0200 Organization: Probably a good idea Message-ID: References: <87hbi3jasy.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1284036988 438 80.91.229.12 (9 Sep 2010 12:56:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 12:56:28 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M19070@lists.math.uh.edu Thu Sep 09 14:56:27 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Otgfx-0002on-Ve for ding-account@gmane.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:56:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Otget-0004rh-GX; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 07:55:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Otgeq-0004rS-Hl for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 07:55:16 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Otgen-0004yS-KK for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 07:55:15 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Otgem-00022z-00 for ; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:55:12 +0200 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Otgei-000234-7y for ding@gnus.org; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:55:08 +0200 Original-Received: from 62.113.137.5 ([62.113.137.5]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:55:08 +0200 Original-Received: from sb by 62.113.137.5 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:55:08 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 25 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.113.137.5 Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:IXeuZv742+JEcgKquKiUmxeUNUc= X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:70697 Archived-At: >>>>> Ted Zlatanov : > I think it's a good direction. The body structure and encapsulation > commands will drive you insane, though. That portion of the RFC was > designed to inflict mental pain. Speaking of the body structure part of IMAP... One thing that has been a desired feature since nnimap's first days: partial download of messages. In particular: to be able to read the text parts of a message and delay the download of big attachments. This was very important 10 years ago, but is probably less so today. Lines are generally faster, and people are less likely to send big attachments. Instead they send a URL. But since this is a capability of the protocol, I think it's worth considering. The nnimap backend leaning on the message structure knowledge of the server may have other benefits than partial downloads...? Previous discussions of the subject: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/52154/focus=52411 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/45839 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/68821/focus=68861