I wish *Thunderbird* supported all IMAP extensions - IMAP

On 30 Jul 2004 kael (kael@alussinan.org) wrote:
>
> I sometimes use Thunderbird to check my IMAP mailbox and I find it nice.

What do you use as your primary IMAP client kael?


> If ACL are not managable now, is it planned to improve Thunderbird on
> this point ?

I recommend that you try Mulberry, which supports ACL management,
and was designed from the beginning to be an IMAP client. I've
tried to use and like Mozilla Mail/News and Thunderbird, but
currently they both pretty much suck as *power* IMAP clients
(IMHO of course).


> May theses wishes become reality.

I agree -- it would be great if there were a good FLOSS power
IMAP client. For now there seems to be only Mulberry and Pine,
neither of which are FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source Software).


Nancy
Infinite Ink
www.ii.com

Hi Nancy,

"Nancy McGough" <nm-reverse-spam-filter@ii.deflexion.com> a écrit dans
le message de news:Pine.OSX.4.61.0407310752590.1179@localhost

> What do you use as your primary IMAP client kael?

It depends on what I want but generally I use Outlook Express - lol. But
I also use Mulberry. Because like you I'm not satisfied of any IMAP
client.

> > If ACL are not managable now, is it planned to improve Thunderbird
on
> > this point ?
>
> I recommend that you try Mulberry, which supports ACL management,
> and was designed from the beginning to be an IMAP client. I've
> tried to use and like Mozilla Mail/News and Thunderbird, but
> currently they both pretty much suck as *power* IMAP clients
> (IMHO of course).

In a way... But Mulberry is excellent except graphically. The
Thunderbird Team could inspire of it to build the next Thunderbird
generations.

> > May theses wishes become reality.
>
> I agree -- it would be great if there were a good FLOSS power
> IMAP client. For now there seems to be only Mulberry and Pine,
> neither of which are FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source Software).

Mulberry is not FLOSS ! It costs 30 $ or something like that...

I hope Thunderbird is gonna become the best IMAP client soon.

--
kael | *Les pieds sur Terre et la Tête dans les étoiles*

On 31 Jul 2004 kael (kael@alussinan.org) wrote:
>> I agree -- it would be great if there were a good FLOSS power
>> IMAP client. For now there seems to be only Mulberry and Pine,
>> neither of which are FLOSS (Free/Libre Open Source Software).
>
> Mulberry is not FLOSS ! It costs 30 $ or something like that...

That's what I said - neither Mulberry nor Pine are FLOSS. BTW,
the term "free/libre" doesn't have anything to do with financial
cost, it has to do with freedom (liberté). Often FLOSS software
is free/gratis because the freedom to redistribute it drives the
price down, but this is not an essential ingredient to being
FLOSS.

Nancy
Infinite Ink
www.ii.com

"Nancy McGough" <nm-reverse-spam-filter@ii.deflexion.com> a écrit dans
le message de news:Pine.OSX.4.61.0407310947310.1179@localhost...

> That's what I said - neither Mulberry nor Pine are FLOSS. BTW,
> the term "free/libre" doesn't have anything to do with financial
> cost, it has to do with freedom (liberté). Often FLOSS software
> is free/gratis because the freedom to redistribute it drives the
> price down, but this is not an essential ingredient to being
> FLOSS.

Sorry, I just wope up...

It' time to make a huge IMAP lobbying close to the Thunberbird team, and
more communication about IMAP in general, mostly on imap servers
capabilities.
May IMAP will finally accomplish its revolution And we will be
completely happy with IMAP. ;-)

--
kael | *Les pieds sur Terre et la Tête dans les étoiles*

kael wrote:
> "Nancy McGough" <nm-reverse-spam-filter@ii.deflexion.com> a écrit dans
> le message de news:Pine.OSX.4.61.0407310947310.1179@localhost...
>
>>That's what I said - neither Mulberry nor Pine are FLOSS. BTW,
>>the term "free/libre" doesn't have anything to do with financial
>>cost, it has to do with freedom (liberté). Often FLOSS software
>>is free/gratis because the freedom to redistribute it drives the
>>price down, but this is not an essential ingredient to being
>>FLOSS.
>
> Sorry, I just wope up...
>
> It' time to make a huge IMAP lobbying close to the Thunberbird team, and
> more communication about IMAP in general, mostly on imap servers
> capabilities.
> May IMAP will finally accomplish its revolution And we will be
> completely happy with IMAP. ;-)

From someone who's recently set up his own home IMAP server, you've got
another lobbyist ;-)

Robin

"Robin Cloutman" <rycochet@rycochet.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:ceg0gm$5db1@ripley.netscape.com
> From someone who's recently set up his own home IMAP server, you've
> got another lobbyist ;-)

Here two others ideas.

- inspired from Mulberry: *selective fetching of different portions of
messages*; the header, the body and ... the attached file. Thus we could
read a message without need to download the X* Mo attached file.

Mulberry allows the best IMAP support for a client. It could be
interesting for the "Mozilla/Thunderbird Team" to inspire from it;
because Mulberry is the best and the unique client that allows a full
use of the "exceedlingly excellent" IMAP capabilities.


- adding a windows that would display the checking status as it is
possible with OE, e.g. Also, allowing to configurate synchronization
options (header, full, why not *body*,) as we can do with OE, except it
doesn't allow to download only the body without the attached file.

[HS: I hope my english is understantable]

--
kael | *Les pieds sur Terre et la tête dans les étoiles*