Offlineimap is dead, long live offlineimap?

[Dominic LoBue]

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Jim Pryor
<lists+offlineimap at jimpryor.net> wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 04:21:53PM +0200, Christoph Höger wrote:
>> > 2. I'm going to have to agree with Jim's response. Python has a large
>> > library and community to work with.
>> >
>> > To combine an answer to your number 3 with the Jim's note about John's
>> > comment on the sad state of imaplib: I have been working on a new
>> > high-level IMAP library for python, and a rewrite of OfflineIMAP. I'm
>> > prepared to support it by fixing bugs, answering questions, and adding
>> > much-desired features; but progress is slow, and frankly I could use
>> > help.
>>
>> Basically there are IMAP libraries available for other languages I was
>> just wondering if the choice of python for such a rather complex source
>> base was more a pro or a con for contributers to join. I did not intend
>> to flame against python.
>
> @Christoph: I didn't think you were flaming Python. I was just stating the
> presumptive case for staying with it. By all means, you or anyone else
> should feel free to nominate specific alternatives and make the case for
> them.
>
>
> @Dominic: your project sounds good. I'm sure the community would like to
> hear more about it.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OfflineIMAP-project mailing list
> OfflineIMAP-project at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/offlineimap-project
>
> OfflineIMAP homepage: http://software.complete.org/offlineimap
>

@Christoph: My apologies; I see what you're getting at now, and
totally agree with you. A lot of what OfflineIMAP currently is is a
result of how it was written. For example, there was a question on the
list a month or so ago about OfflineIMAP not deleting folders locally
that have been deleted locally. John replied to the thread saying he
thought of that as a feature. I know what's going on in the code to be
able to say that that functionality is a by-product, and was not
explicitly written that way.

 Not quite sure how to write up what you're talking about though. Can
you point to any examples?


@Jim: I've mentioned the rewrite a couple of times on this list, but
haven't heard much back about it besides "looking forward to it". To
be fair, I didn't have anything to show yet. Any suggestions on where
to go looking?

What I need more than anything is someone to bounce ideas off of, and
to point out the flaws in my logic.

-- 
Dominic LoBue