[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Email programs that work.



On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 05:14:27PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> s. keeling wrote:
> > Steve Lamb <grey@dmiyu.org>:
> >>      It lacks the ability to use the SMTP interface to send mail, being
> >>  restricted to the command line to get the job done.
> 
> > It's an MUA.  Use SMTP.
> 
>     Exactly.  I would love to but it can't.
> 
> >>      It lacks filtering.
> 
> > Like a washing machine sucks as a dishwasher.
> 
>     Yet filtering belongs in the client, especially if that client has
> multiple accounts since one wouldn't want the same filters to apply to all
> accounts.
> 
I would have to respectfully disagree with you here.  If you are using
POP, you might have a case.  However, if you are using IMAP, then the
filtering belongs on the server.  I like knowing that no matter which of
the three different clients I use from the three computers in my house
or any of the computers at work see the same thing.  That is, when I
decide to filter debian list mail to a particular folder, then I should
not need to implement that on two or three MUAs on half a dozen hosts.
I should be able to log into the server, do it once there and have it
take effect everywhere.

The same goes with Spam.  I don't have to train more than one Spam
filter, that being the one on the server.

> >>      It lacks a decent IMAP implementation.  Hint, IMAP is not a glorified
> >>   POP.
> 
> > Don't care.
> 
>     You don't.  I do.  I rather like being able to read mail on my Debian
> laptop, my WinXP Game machine or any machine with a web-capable browser and
> get all of my mail all of the time.
> 
But yet, you want the client to handle all your filtering for you?  That
makes no sense.

> >>      It lacks a decent multi-account implementation.  Having to configure
> >>  every single item by hand without the concept of account inheritance is 
> >>  a nightmare.
> 
> > You have a ridiculously complicated "system" for organizing your mail,
> > and it's mutt's fault for doing what it does well.  No.
> 
>     A rediculously complicated system?  What's so complicated about it.  Let's
> see, I have home mail and I have work mail.  I configure my home account with
> 1 signature, 1 POP/IMAP server, 1 SMTP server.  All the mail remains separate.
>  All my home filters only apply to my home mail.  I need a work account I
> configure 1 signature, 1 POP/IMAP server, 1 SMTP server.  All mail remains
> separate.  All my work filters only apply to my work mail.
> 
>     Mutt, by contrast, requires you to first.... learn how to run an SMTP
> server, shove all your work and home mail through it where you then have to
> write filters which separate it back out.  Nevermind that all filters apply to
> all mail all of the time.  Then, once it is filtered out, you need to go
> through for every freakin' folder and define which address it is supposed to
> come from, which sent-mail folder it is supposed to go to, which signature to
> use.  Add a new folder?  Have to do it all over again.  And heaven help the
> person who wants to send home mail through his home SMTP server and work mail
> through his work SMTP server because of sticky little work policies which
> state that all mail that passes through the work server is subject to being
> read at any time by any upper management or security personell, work servers
> are not to be used for personal mail and any work mail which is going between
> two employees in the company must go through the work SMTP server whenever
> possible to prevent outside companies from being able to record and review
> confidential documents.  So know what that means?  Right, back to the SMTP
> server to mangle outbound mail to go to the right server and pray they don't
> nail you for the Received line.  That alone shows that Mutt is far more
> complex than it needs to be.  Separate how outbound mail gets to its
> destination in modern clients *one freaking configuration option*.  To do it
> in Mutt requires advanced SMTP server techniques!
> 
Have you even bothered to Google search for "mutt multiple accounts"?
It appears that the account-hook configuration setting can be used to
set up a number of different IMAP accounts between which you can switch
quite easily.  No local SMTP server setup required.  Besides, mutt is
only complex because of its extreme flexibility.

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: