[imp] Display of folders from Cyrus IMAPD

[Aleksandar Milivojevic]

Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:

> Quoting Aleksandar Milivojevic <alex at milivojevic.org>:
>
>> In the old versions of IMP (4.0.x and older), IMP was displaying the
>> folders from my Cyrus servers like:
>>
>> INBOX
>>    Subfolder1
>>    Subfolder2
>> Shared folder
>>
>> Which is the way folders exist on IMAP server, the way they are
>> reported by IMAP server, and the way every mail client in known
>> universe (that I've been using so far) displays them.
>>
>> IMP 4.1 attempts to be "smart" and autodetect things.  And as soon as
>> it smells Cyrus on the other side it starts displaying my folders as:
>>
>> INBOX
>> Subfolder1
>> Subfolder2
>> Shared folder
>>
>> Basically same braindamaged thing as when setting "namespace" option
>> to 'INBOX.' in older versions of IMP.
>>
>> This is extremely confusing.  My folders appear at the same level as
>> the shared folders...  If one of my folders has same name as one of
>> the shared folders, there's no way to tell which is which in IMP 4.1.
>> Any way to get old behaviour back?  I do want to see my folders as
>> subfolders of INBOX (the way they exist on my IMAP server).
>
> See http://bugs.horde.org/ticket/?id=2422.  This is expected, and
> preferred, behavior.

OK, but how to get the old behaviour back?

I've checked out the above ticket.  I guess that is a thing of user's  
personal preference.  For me, it is not expected, and definetely not  
preferred!  I would really like if I'm not forced to use it.  As I can  
see from the ticket, there was at least one more person complaining  
about same thing (seems he was completely ignored).

Installations that want IMP 4.1 behaviour, usually have altnamespace  
option set in imapd.conf on Cyrus server (and than get consistent  
behaviour on all mail clients, plus altnamespace option does it in a  
way better and more usable way than IMP does it).  If my server is not  
using altnamespace option, I would expect to see my subfolders as  
subfolders of INBOX, not as top-level folders intermixed with shared  
folders.

I guess this is not a big issue for folks that don't use shared  
folders (which I guess are majority of the folks out there).  It's a  
real nightmare when shared folders are used.  I simpy can't see why  
would anybody (who uses shared folders) "prefer" to have it the way  
IMP 4.1 implements it...

-- 
See Ya' later, alligator!
http://www.8-P.ca/