[Dovecot] How long to 1.0?

[Kenneth Porter]

On Tuesday, January 10, 2006 10:07 AM -0600 Eric Rostetter 
<rostetter at mail.utexas.edu> wrote:

> I am one of the view who have not been able to use dovecot because it
> isn't stable enough, and as such I'm one of the few who stands behind
> the alpha naming of it.

How stable is "enough"? What server are you comparing it to? And if another 
server is more stable, what would motivate us to switch back to Dovecot 
once it achieves comparable stability?

I switched from UW-IMAP based on the Fedora switch, and Dovecot seems much 
faster than the UW code. (I'm using sendmail/procmail with mbox on the 
delivery side, and UW's own mbx format when I was using UW-IMAP.)

The one issue I've seen with Dovecot (still using 0.99) is the occasional 
corruption of one Thunderbird user's Trash folder with the insertion of a 
few K of nul's at the top.

I'd guess that Timo's designation of 1.0 as "alpha" is what keeps Fedora 
from updating to it.