Subject: [sup-talk] Love your commenting style, mate!

From: [email-masked] (Magnus Therning)
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:12:53 +0100

Just have to say I _love_ the comment at the top of imap.rb.  Don't know
if you have any experience of standardisation processes but I've never
heard of any that doesn't defy logic.

Out of curiosity, what brand of imap server is it you have at your
disposal?  (So I can stay away from it.)

/M

-- 
Magnus Therning                             (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4)
magnus?therning?org             Jabber: magnus?therning?gmail?com
http://therning.org/magnus
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/sup-talk/attachments/20070915/30b8770a/attachment.bin

---

From: [email-masked] (William Morgan)
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 11:42:22 -0700

Excerpts from Magnus Therning's message of Sat Sep 15 11:12:53 -0700 2007:
> Just have to say I _love_ the comment at the top of imap.rb.  Don't
> know if you have any experience of standardisation processes but I've
> never heard of any that doesn't defy logic.

Thanks! I wrote that in a pretty frustrated state (obviously) and
rereading it, I don't think IMAP is quite as terrible as I make it out
to be. Though it certainly smacks of design-by-committee, and one also
gets the distinct impression the committee was composed of people who
would be writing servers, not clients.

> disposal?  (So I can stay away from it.)

The uidvalidity thing was an issue with some version of the UW imap
server I was receiving mail on, and the spurious flag response thing was
some version of Binc that Brian was connecting to. Of course both
servers do perfectly valid things as far as the spec is concerned.

-- 
William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>