[Dovecot] IMAP aggregation and MUPDATE protocolo
Ernesto Revilla Derksen
erevilla at yaco.es
Fri Dec 10 01:41:03 EET 2010
Pls, see below.
2010/11/26 Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi>:
> On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 00:43 +0100, Ernesto Revilla Derksen wrote:
>> Is IMAP aggregation proxying really so difficult? I know about the
>> problems of COPY (which in some cases in Cyrus-Murder is handled by
>> the proxy itself), but don't know if there are any other gotchas.
> Are you thinking about simple proxying, so that if you switch to
> mailbox1 it would do a connection to server1 which would completely
> handle it, so that until next SELECT/EXAMINE is done the proxy would
> just do dummy proxying?
Well, this may not be enough.
> Maybe something like that would work, but I'm not very interested in
> doing it. Also it would limit some features that could be made available
> (e.g. virtual mailboxes wouldn't work with it). There are many more
> interesting things that can be done with a smarter proxy.
One thing we would like to have a powerful search engine, so that a
user could locate any message, document, etc. that he/she has access
to. The searches may be split between all backends, and the front-end
would aggregate search results.
Yes, we would be very interested in that libstorage thing. Our initial
backends are Dovecot, Alfresco and an issue tracker, like Redmine. The
issue tracker has actually NO IMAP interface. But perhaps we could
offer a libstorage provider or a feed like Activity Feed, etc.
Could you give us a rough estimate of how many workin hours or days
this could take? We'd need at least an pure imap aggregator and then
we could talk about other converters.
Beside this, I'm still in doubt about if we're on the correct way of
unifying information of different sources.
More information about the dovecot