[Freedombox-discuss] imap <-> http proxy? was Re: email recommendations?
- Subject: [Freedombox-discuss] imap <-> http proxy? was Re: email recommendations?
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org (James Vasile)
- Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 09:11:54 -0500
- Message-id: <[🔎] email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <4D6B40BD.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <AANLkTindEpcHvwsLRXPbpk2Ws8FtAXz-5V=yhTTaNk3_@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <AANLkTikb5aXChP=nPNr+P9WLbbN-cVBd+AAz8wVKhq6e@mail.gmail.com> <email@example.com> <4D6B40BD.firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 01:29:17 -0500, Joseph Annino <joeaguy at joeaguy.com> wrote:
> So I have been working on a web based mail client, and I have taken the
> approach of the client keeping mail in its own database, so it can do
> its own indexing, organisation, and search of the email. I understand
> this gets away from a purely standards based approach. Lots of webmail
> clients seem to be just wrappers that pass through to IMAP, while
> desktop email applications like Thunderbrid, etc, take the approach of
> syncing mail to their own database. This allows for more complex
> searches and greater speed than the IMAP protocol can deliver. Also a
> message database does not have to limit itself to traditional email. It
> could have inputs and outputs to other protocols that provide better
> trust, security, etc, than SMTP and friends.
Joe, take a look at notmuch, the email db backend. It's the fastest,
easiest way to snarf a bunch of mail into a db and then organize it by
tags (which of course can also be called folders). It's headed for 1.0
and is fairly stable and robust. There are no significant web clients
built on it, but if you base on this you can do UI and have the backend
largely done out of the box.