Re: panda-imap VS uw-imap

On Mon, 10 Jun 2013, Deniss wrote:

> Hello Jonathan, David
>
> is the code at https://github.com/jonabbey/panda-imap full working
> version of Mark's panda-imap ?
>
> Can it replace uw-imap in production environment ?
>
>
>
> On 2013.06.09. 22:02, [email protected] wrote:
[snip..]
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: [Imap-protocol] Re: UW-IMAPD and its interpretation	of
>>       ESEARCH (David B Funk)
[snip..]

Deniss,
As far as I know, Jon's copy is a full version of Mark's panda-imap.
I've never actually seen Mark's final work, but it looks like his style ;)
and seems mostly complete, baring one specific omission.

As far as its being a functional replacement for UW imapd, I'm running it in
production right now. It's not quite a total replacement for the UW kit insofar
as its missing the "utils" directory (which contained things like "mixcvt"
"mixdfix" & "mixrbld") but pretty much everything else seems to be there
(including the tops-20 kit).

You need to understand that I have a somewhat atypical view of Mark's work.
I take it as a work-in-progress and add a bunch of local customizations to
it (such as adding "QUOTA" support, a Kerberos authenticator, and a local
adaptation of "black-box" mode) to create our production service.
However most of my tweaks & patches applied directly to panda with few
changes. So I'd call panda a direct follow-on to UW-imap 2007e.

Dave