Re: maildir vs. mbox vs. mh ???
Vineet Kumar wrote:
>
> * Michael D. Schleif (mds@helices.org) [030210 12:24]:
> > Under netscrape I have directory hierarchies such as:
> >
> > Lists
> > |__debian
> > | |__debian-users
> > | |__debian-devel
> > |__tomcat-users
> >
> > With many lists and so many old mails, a flat list of _all_ Maildirs
> > will quickly become difficult to navigate . . .
> >
> > How can this be done with Maildir?
>
> Just the same. Wherever you have an mbox file, replace it with a
> maildir directory.
>
> You can even go one better by having maildirs which themselves contain
> subdirectories, something that is impossible with mbox files.
>
> For example, you could have a maildir called work which contains
> unsorted messages, and also sub-maildirs for each client. Each client
> maildir can contain messages as well as yet more sub-maildirs for e.g.
> certain projects, time periods, contacts, etc.
>
> I don't believe netscape includes support for the maildir format,
> though, so you may not be able to do this, unless you do something like
> run an IMAP server such as courier and use netscape to access the mail
> through the IMAP interface.
What I think you are saying is _exactly_ what I want to do!
Perhaps, I misunderstand something?
I have tried this, both via maildirmake [-f] and manually, neither of
which are seen by mutt ?!?!
Is this, then, a deficiency of mutt?
If so, what other than mutt ought I to consider?
What do you think?
--
Best Regards,
mds
mds resource
888.250.3987
Dare to fix things before they break . . .
Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we
think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . .
Reply to: