On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:55:56PM +0200, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin wrote: > > On the other hand, if we're hoping to get rid of this code in favor of > > the curl-based approach, then it's not worth spending time on > > cosmetic refactoring, as long as it still behaves correctly in the > > interim. > > Looking at the code, it seems the tunnel mode always uses the legacy imap approach. > This would have to be ported to curl and stabilized before dropping the legacy code. Urgh. That's an important mode, I'd think, and one that I have a feeling curl may not be interested in supporting, just because of it's complexity. And even if they did, it would take a while for that curl version to become available. So maybe the idea of deprecating the non-curl implementation is not something that can happen anytime soon. :( > In the meantime, it might be worth doing a bit of cleanup. In which case, yeah, it is definitely worth cleaning up the existing code. But I also agree with you that it's worth making sure the curl version behaves as similarly as possible. -Peff
