MBOX-Line: From imantc at gmail.com  Tue Mar 10 04:29:50 2015
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Imants Cekusins <imantc@gmail.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:54 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] If Crispin were creating IMAP today how would
 it be different?
In-Reply-To: <80feadb5-24d0-4be9-a6d9-7885f422ad07@flaska.net>
References: <54FAEB94.4070508@lavabitllc.com> <54FBF289.3010202@psaux.com>
	<7164.1425831184@parc.com>
	<1425907661.1215497.237833469.1EDA571D@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<6506.1425915329@parc.com>
	<B03452330F6149E180E449A493F28C2B@gmail.com>
	<CAP1qinZdV1LW6XiWfqfk2A+TC6HsYsAWtT-KSffTNdOFqG_Tjw@mail.gmail.com>
	<80feadb5-24d0-4be9-a6d9-7885f422ad07@flaska.net>
Message-ID: <CAP1qinat-aNSnNgTm+fJyftapwU9RGno=B5z9RVy9T1gA6C97A@mail.gmail.com>

> benchmarking a recent version of one of the popular Linux mail servers at first (perhaps Postfix with Dovecot or Cyrus)

I tried to set up and configure this exact combination for virtual
hosting. It took me a long time and in the end I gave up. Yes, I
understand someone somewhere succeeded to configure it. My point is
not that it is impossible to set it up.

My point (well, other than speed, robustness & simplicity) is that
with simplifed protocols though we could have more servers, a choice
between servers & configurations, supporting multitude of storage
backends.

Wouldn't it be nice - to choose? eh?

