[PATCH 0/8] Re: Reintroduce IDLE; update imaplib2

[Nicolas Sebrecht]

On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 06:46:17AM -0500, Ethan Glasser-Camp wrote:
> 
> This is a rewrite of the branch I was working on to get IMAP IDLE
> readded. It uses a brand-spanking-new version of imaplib2 which Piers
> Lauder released to provide timeout functionality (thanks Piers!). I've
> been running this version here and it seems relatively robust, and
> when the connection breaks, timeouts occur consistently and in a
> timely fashion.

Good news!

> I'm not done looking over IDLE support, but I would like feedback on
> this series since it is the foundation for getting IDLE into
> offlineimap. Would you prefer to have the imaplib2 update patches
> separated out, i.e. merge an "update imaplib2" branch? Should I munge
> the original patch series to combine the introduction/updates of
> imaplib2? Please advise.

It looks a bit ugly to revert already reverted commits and asks us to do
extra work to read the true commit message. At least, you could readd
the original message into it.

What could be even better is to reintroduce the series the same way it
never existed before (except giving credits to the original authors).
Rebasing the whole series may be a bit tricky: it shouldn't end up into
a big commit alone.

I think it worth to reintroduce the series as a new topic branch to have
it clean, easier to review and without these odd commits referring to
older stage than the last library version. It would also help
cleaning-up the original patches, if needed (and it looks like it does).

-- 
Nicolas Sebrecht