Re: [MORG] Getting MORG moving

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Timo Sirainen wrote:

>On 2.2.2010, at 0.54, Barry Leiba wrote:
>  
>
>>Does the working group think these are important and worth proceeding
>>with?  Will there be enough implementation of them for it to be worth
>>putting them through?  Or are we just writing them because they're
>>plausible, but they'll wind up sitting on the shelf in a list of
>>seldom-implemented IMAP extensions.
>>    
>>
>>> - Address Search (Arnt)
>>>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-morg-address-search
>>>      
>>>
>From server point of view this is easy enough, so I could implement this for Dovecot. But I can't speak for client implementors.
>  
>
I think this would make writing clients easier, especially if they 
require such extension.
How practical the latter assumption - I don't know.

>>> - In Thread (Arnt)
>>>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-morg-inthread
>>>      
>>>
>This is useful internally for Dovecot (for virtual mailboxes) and I've already implemented the actual SEARCH INTHREAD part of this.
>
As a server implementor I find this useful

>Whether it's useful to actual IMAP clients, again, I don't know.
>  
>
Same here.

>>> - Collations (Alexey)
>>>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-morg-collations
>>>      
>>>
>I thought we already agreed that we don't know (or don't agree) what the important collations are and this was put on hold.
>
Yes. There was some talk about working on a space ignore collation instead.