On 2022-08-29, OB-Linux GNU wrote:
> Hello
>
> I use imapsync occasionally. In the new version, it sends emails to
> users at every run. I want to prevent this. (h...@imapsync.tk)
>
> is there any way to prevent this?
>
>
I don't think this soft is in the official
Hello
I use imapsync occasionally. In the new version, it sends emails to
users at every run. I want to prevent this. (h...@imapsync.tk)
is there any way to prevent this?
Hi Daniel and everybody,
It's a reply for the Daniel's message
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/10/msg00481.html
I encounter the topic sometimes, how about imapsync back into Debian?
As the author of imapsync, my quick answer is yes, I would be pleased
to see imapsync br
Florian Pelgrim writes:
>
> I wanted to start now a rant against Cyrus but holy shit... They have
> got a new website and it all looks modern... Maybe I should take a look
> on it again.
>
I don't care if it *looks* modern, as long as it has more information
than the old site(s); I quite like Cyru
Hi,
> It is a server with Squeeze and
> they do not even bother to use the LTS repositories, so more than two
> years ago that server is without security updates.
Problems I defently see to much in the web... :(
> So that is a not minor matter that we have to consider to be sure that
> this site
Daniel Bareiro:
> On 14/10/16 16:30, Jochen Spieker wrote:
>
>>> I am planning to migrate about 200 e-mail accounts from a mail server
>>> using Dovecot to a mail server running Cyrus.
>
>> Sounds weird! I though most people migrate _to_ Dovecot nowadays (if
>> they haven't already). Care to elab
system users accounts,
>> etc) in the source and destination servers. Following this course of
>> action, I found this [1] interesting article written by Falko Timme in
>> HowtoForge.
> Offlineimap can also do IMAP to IMAP synchronization. The author of
> imapsync mentions it
ed (MAILDIR, system users accounts,
> etc) in the source and destination servers. Following this course of
> action, I found this [1] interesting article written by Falko Timme in
> HowtoForge.
Offlineimap can also do IMAP to IMAP synchronization. The author of
imapsy
nst upstream wishes. I suppose
> there are exceptions, but IMHO there aren't any exceendingly good
> reasons to have imapsync as one of them.
>
> I am not going to even bother trying to understand if we can actually
> distribute imapsync in Debian main given its very unusual lice
xceendingly good
reasons to have imapsync as one of them.
I am not going to even bother trying to understand if we can actually
distribute imapsync in Debian main given its very unusual license:
http://imapsync.lamiral.info/LICENSE
Besides, it looks like the software is priced extremely fairly. You
it through IMAP. This would also be
agnostic to the storage mechanism used (MAILDIR, system users accounts,
etc) in the source and destination servers. Following this course of
action, I found this [1] interesting article written by Falko Timme in
HowtoForge.
But it seems that imapsync is no longer
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:41:42 +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Tue 21 Jun 2011 at 17:10:14 +, Camaleón wrote:
>
>> Great, but I've also read this (which is the reason why the packages
>> was removed):
>>
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=609845#60
>
> The Debian maintainer ceased t
On Tue 21 Jun 2011 at 13:28:11 -0400, Tom H wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Camaleón wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I've alredy read it, and...? I still don't get his point. What's the
> > gain in limiting its distribution? You can still charge the users for it.
>
> I think that the developer wa
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:28:11 -0400, Tom H wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Camaleón wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I've alredy read it, and...? I still don't get his point. What's
>> the gain in limiting its distribution? You can still charge the users
>> for it.
>
> I think that the developer was
On Tue 21 Jun 2011 at 17:10:14 +, Camaleón wrote:
> Great, but I've also read this (which is the reason why the packages was
> removed):
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=609845#60
The Debian maintainer ceased to maintain the package and said why.
Nobody else has stepped
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Camaleón wrote:
>
> Yes, I've alredy read it, and...? I still don't get his point. What's the
> gain in limiting its distribution? You can still charge the users for it.
I think that the developer was pissed off by this email:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 19:07:12 +0200, Javier Barroso wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Camaleón wrote:
>>> If you buy it you can do what do you want (WTFPL license) with it, so
>>> you can distribute if you want. But I imagine buying software to
>>> distribute it is not the Debian Philosop
be distributed by anyone :-?
>
> He has never said that. Quite the opposite:
Ein?
> I repeat with precision "No. Do what you want". I promise I won't
> complain anymore about the fact imapsync is on Debian or not.
>
> And
>
> >> As far as I can see,
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Camaleón wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:46:29 +0200, Javier Barroso wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Camaleón wrote:
>
> (...)
>
[1] http://www.linux-france.org/prj/imapsync_list/msg00732.html
>>>
>>> Yes, I've alredy read it, and...? I still don
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:46:29 +0200, Javier Barroso wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Camaleón wrote:
(...)
>>> [1] http://www.linux-france.org/prj/imapsync_list/msg00732.html
>>
>> Yes, I've alredy read it, and...? I still don't get his point. What's
>> the gain in limiting its distribu
I repeat with precision "No. Do what you want". I promise I won't
complain anymore about the fact imapsync is on Debian or not.
And
>> As far as I can see, the author of this software has even said in a
>> message in this bug report that "You can even ma
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Camaleón wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:09:39 +0200, Javier Barroso wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Camaleón wrote:
>
Have a look at
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=609845#65 -
it
>>> seems
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:09:39 +0200, Javier Barroso wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Camaleón wrote:
>>> Have a look at
>>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=609845#65 -
>>> it
>> seems
>>> the author wanted it removed because he started to charge
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Camaleón wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:05 -0700, dlists wrote:
>
>>> Would you know the reasons why "imapsync" has been in Lenny but no more
>>> in "squeeze" nor "sid"?
>>
>> Hey Mihamina,
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:01:05 -0700, dlists wrote:
>> Would you know the reasons why "imapsync" has been in Lenny but no more
>> in "squeeze" nor "sid"?
>
> Hey Mihamina,
>
> Have a look at
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/b
> Hi all,
> Would you know the reasons why "imapsync" has been in Lenny but no more
> in "squeeze" nor "sid"?
Hey Mihamina,
Have a look at
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=609845#65 - it seems the
author wanted it removed beca
On 21/06/11 14:46, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Would you know the reasons why "imapsync" has been in Lenny but no more
> in "squeeze" nor "sid"?
>
from:-
http://packages.qa.debian.org/i/imapsync.html
todo :- The package should be
Hi all,
Would you know the reasons why "imapsync" has been in Lenny but no more
in "squeeze" nor "sid"?
--
RMA.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.deb
28 matches
Mail list logo
