Re: [SM-USERS] What IMAP to run

2003-03-21 Thread William R. Mussatto
> The main problem I had with uw-imap was that it didn't want to display > folders correctly in squirrelmail. I posted a while back about the > problem and despite repeated attempts never managed to figure out what > was going on with the system. I might take another look at it though. > At least

Re: [SM-USERS] What IMAP to run

2003-03-19 Thread Keith Mastin
> My question for the group is, what imap servers are people running, and > do you recommend. Is it worth all the hurdles to get cyrus installed? > Is there another option I've totally missed? Courier would be the > perfect server if it wasn't for the damn inbox thing (and the author's > holier

Re: [SM-USERS] What IMAP to run

2003-03-19 Thread jeffc
The main problem I had with uw-imap was that it didn't want to display folders correctly in squirrelmail. I posted a while back about the problem and despite repeated attempts never managed to figure out what was going on with the system. I might take another look at it though. At least I'm not

Re: [SM-USERS] What IMAP to run

2003-03-19 Thread William R. Mussatto
> Ok, I've been playing around now for a little while and things are > getting pretty close to production. I've tried courier and uw-imap and > each has its drawbacks. I'm using 1.40rc1 and php 4.3 on a rh 7.3 box > and > generally like the behavior of courier except for the fact that ALL > folde

[SM-USERS] What IMAP to run

2003-03-19 Thread jeffc
Ok, I've been playing around now for a little while and things are getting pretty close to production. I've tried courier and uw-imap and each has its drawbacks. I'm using 1.40rc1 and php 4.3 on a rh 7.3 box and generally like the behavior of courier except for the fact that ALL folders must be c