Re: pronto users ???
-- Vineet Kumar <debian-user@virtual.doorstop.net> wrote
(on Thursday, 13 February 2003, 05:29 PM -0800):
> * Michael D. Schleif (mds@helices.org) [030213 14:16]:
> >
> > Any pronto mua users here?
>
> You could grep this mailbox for User-Agent headers...
... and you'll likely find about half of them use mutt... ;-)
> > <snip>... I am working on moving a 2GB, ~1000000
> > message, ~500 folder, ~400 messages per day mail archive to debian
> > woody. Currently, this is used by netscrape mail in an convenient and
> > elaborate hierarchy of folders sometimes (10) or more levels deep.
> >
> > I'm testing mutt; but, I have not found as convenient a solution to the
> > many nested subfolder syndrome, especially regarding the navigation of
> > folders from within mutt.
What don't you like about the navigation? What kind of mail format are
you using (Maildir, mbox, MH...)? I use IMAP (more on that below), and I
like the ability to define mailboxes I use regularly for 'one stop
shopping', as well as being able to navigate my "tree" when I want to.
Best yet, I can do it all from my keyboard....
Is that the part you don't like -- that it's console-based? If so, mutt
definitely *isn't* for you. However, give it a try -- I was a die-hard
GUI mail-reader fanatic, but was constantly getting frustrated with the
memory and CPU overhead of GUI apps (I'm on a 366Mhz machine that, until
recently, had minimal memory). I forced myself to try mutt for a couple
weeks, and I've never gone back.
> > Further investigation shows that pronto supports nested subfolders; but,
> > <http://www.muhri.net/pronto/> has not revealed much detail.
I used Pronto! for a few months a couple years ago, and recall liking
it. What I *didn't* like is that I recall it storing messages in a MySQL
database -- however, I see it now has support for mbox and Maildir, so
that's a moot issue. However, because it *did* use a database, the
programmer had done a nice job with nested folders (I think every
programmer at some point tries their hand at trees and folders).
<snip>
> As a side note, I can recommend that the most convenient way I've found
> to transport mail from proprietary stores (outlook, etc.) to righteous
> ones is via an IMAP server. Should you decide to just move everything
> to the IMAP store and keep it there, this gives you the advantage of
> being able to access the same data and folder hierarchy from whatever
> MUA you feel like at any time (and from whatever site, no less).
I *heartily* second this! For several years, I kept trying just about
every new mailer I came across because the one I was using didn't have X
feature, or because the new mailer had this new cool Y feature... I
can't tell you how many times I had to move mail stores from one app to
another or one format to another.... Ugghh! Finally I got the idea to
throw up an IMAP server, and it made these "conversions" so much easier,
as I never had to worry about the backend -- just the frontend.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
matthew@weierophinney.net
Reply to: