Re: [Jmap] Best vs Good enough - adoption of JMAP

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> I think a modern mail store already has need for this type of scheduled
> events for many cases, and as such is implemented by many of them.

> Off the top of my head, beyond undo send/future send,

Done on the MTA side of things, where the queue structures don't have to map to
users and there are many, many, many orders of magnitude less data.

> there is also
> automatic emptying of the trash,

There's no need for a queue or queue management to do folder content
expiration.

> remind me later, and enterprise style retention policies.

These are simply elaborations on future release and folder content expiration.

> Once you have such a model, you'll find it useful for a bunch of other
> things, such as data migration or applying changes across a very large mail
> store.

Again, that just doesn't match our reality.

				Ned