Re: [imap5] Designing a new replacement protocol for IMAP

[Mark Crispin <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> Go for it.  I said the comments of haters who want to hate were
> welcome too, and I stand by it.

Bwahahahaha! Complaining about "haters" just like a 13-year-old girl!

If you really were competent enough to do what you purpose to do, you
would babble less about "haters" (and public proclamations of what you
purpose to do), and instead go off quietly on your own to do it. You'd
also stay quiet about it until you had something concrete to show for it.

"Concrete" means a written specification and interoperable code, both of
which can be reviewed. Then it goes the entire IETF process, in which
everybody and his grandmother weights in on how to "improve" what you have
done (so much for "regularity" and "consistency" as each "improvement"
goes in). Then, and only then, you try to convince the Big Players that
they is a compelling reason why they should adopt it instead of IMAP.

I know how long it took me, and I wasn't trying to replace something that
was already widely deployed.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.