On Wednesday, July 20, 2011 08:07:31 PM Kevin Krammer wrote: > On Wednesday, 2011-07-20, Anne Wilson wrote: > > Many of those things have already been addressed. Yes, any database that > > attempts to index everything is going to be big. The KMail issue, > > though, I consider to be more serious. I take it that you are using the > > experimental KMail2? I understand that IMAP and DIMAP have been merged, > > and I assume that that means DIMAP (downloaded) in every case. I'm not > > too happy about that myself. > > IMAP and DIMAP have only been merged in the sense that KMail no longer > contains any kinds differences between the two account types, nor does the > IMAP resource as the new IMAP server accessor. > It does not mean that there is no "online" IMAP anymore, that still exists. > > Local caching of mails is now actually doable on a much more fine grained > level, e.g. on per-folder than on per-account basis. > As far as I know there is just no folder level UI for that yet, so "DIMAP > account" still cache all folders and "IMAP accounts" cache none. > Kevin, you're doing a wonderful job of trying to explain everything to us,but I have to admit, I'm still confused. Anne -- New to KDE Software? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___________________________________________________ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
