[PATCH] introduce a virtual imaplib2 (was: Separate imaplib2 from offlineimap)
nicolas.s-dev at laposte.net
Wed Jun 8 13:20:06 BST 2016
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 07:08:15AM +0000, Franz Fellner wrote:
> This might get challenging for distributions shipping live packages or regular git snapshots.
I was not aware there are distros "blindy" packaging. Which ones do this?
Or, do you mean they pick versions outside the official releases?
> And how to deal with distributions patching imaplib2? That might get intersting in case such a
> patch fixes an issue offlineimap works around...
Patches should be applied upstream in the first place. If patches are
rejected, there likely are good reasons.
> Of course one could mention in the readme to either not patch imaplib2 or use the bundled one.
Yes, we can only support "vanilla" imaplib2. Your point convince me this
is not obvious. So, I'll make this explicit to make it clear.
> But who knows what distris do in the end ;)
You're right. However, it's quite easy to check if distros are doing bad
things in this area because most of them work in the open. If we have
doubts we can find a server with the package, download and check.
The worst case is not the ditros. I assume distribution maintainers know
what they do. The worst case is the users. Anybody could patch the
imaplib2 library without even changing the version. Also, we don't have
a strong policy. We allow any newer imaplib2 for flexibility.
So, we have to explain why we can't support random versions of imaplib2.
Goood points Franz.
More information about the OfflineIMAP-project