On 07/29/14 16:43, Anton Aylward wrote:
On 07/28/2014 09:02 PM, Joachim Schrod wrote:
qopper was light-weight. Dovecot is a jack-hammer. It is *not* the other way round.
We are forced to use Dovecot, if we don't want to support our own sources and installation. We are forced to supplant a light-weight POP3 solution by an IMAP jack-hammer that we don't need.
For Daamon that may be the case.
We have agreed already, that Damon probably doesn't need any of it -- if Thunderbird supports Unix mailspools, where there is a high probability. My last email took the discussion further, about general usage of qpopper beyond Damon's use case.
For me, its not.
I don't have a problem with you using Dovecot if you need its functionality. I have a problem if you tell me that a light-weight POP3 server like qpopper is not needed any more. I have presented a use case that is straight forward: automated email processing of a mail account on another system, while not using IMAP or other network-aware rMUAs for other accounts.
Nobody is forcing you to do anything.
I beg to differ. When a tool that I used for decades disappears from a distribution, I *am* forced to do something. I don't do that change by free choice, it doesn't come with any advantage for me. Joachim -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Joachim Schrod, Roedermark, Germany Email: jschrod@acm.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org