www.courier-mta.org/fud -> www.courier-mta.org/fud/
FUD attack, or when I strongly suspect that someone's merely repeating the same FUD without being aware of its historical background. Rather than having to rebut the same, worn-out FUD every time, I now refer people to this web page. My spirited detractors always seem to forget to mention a few details, before condemning me to the tenth level of Hades.. I think that people need to be aware of the following history before forming any conclusions. All of the following historical timeline was pulled straight out of Google archives. Google files from that time period are somewhat sketchy, but still contain enough detail to piece together most of the key events.
Well, as it turned out, Bernstein eventually won this argument, even though working in Crispin's favor (and supporting his position) were certain other technical problems with the RFC 931 document.
Maildirs addressed several long-standing shortcomings of the traditional Bezerkeley mbox mail format (the default mail format used by the UW-IMAP server) that have been known for some time. Between 1995 and 1999 Qmail gained popularity until it became the second most popular mail server on the Internet. With Qmail's popularity growing, people began asking Crispin about adding support for Qmail's maildirs to the UW-IMAP server. Crispin, still simmering over losing the flame war over RFC 931, flogged this opportunity for all it was worth.
Although he was always quick in gratuitously declining all requests to add maildir support to the UW-IMAP server, he wasn't too forthcoming in explaining his reasoning why maildirs were so supposedly inefficient in an IMAP context. Sometimes he went as far as mentioning some filesystem-specific factors, but that was far from a complete explanation. Furthermore, he never told anyone about his old flame war with Dan Bernstein. Chapter III This remained the status quo until early 2000.
After the first few public releases, many people quickly discovered this fast, small, IMAP server, which simply defied the notion that it was not possible to have an efficient IMAP server based on maildirs. People stopped pestering Crispin about adding maildir support to the UW-IMAP server, because a viable, working alternative was now available. Suddenly, Crispin was no longer able to get his jollies by badmouthing maildirs (and taking indirect swipes at Qmail and Bernstein). Publicly, he went on the offensive, claiming that there was something improper, or non-compliant, about the IMAP implementation in Courier (but, like always, short on details).
original link) Epilogue And that's how this FUD started. My response to claims that Courier-IMAP is not a compliant IMAP server is very simple: there was no such thing as a "compliant" IMAP server, because Crispin's IMAP specification makes that an impossible goal.
RFC 3501 identified over a hundred corrections to RFC 2060. Observe that RFC 3501 does not define a new version of the IMAP protocol. This is a "revised" document, which attempts to clarify and address numerous issues and inaccuracies in the original specification (some of which I noted publicly). And, to make things even more interesting, as of this date there are already several reported errata to 3501. Furthermore, RFC 3501 actually changed the IMAP protocol, adding several new requirements, but it kept the IMAP4rev1 version. In other words: the protocol has changed, but it's still the same protocol, officially. So, how is it possible to define what exactly is a "compliant" IMAP server, when the IMAP specification is such a moving target? I am unable to come up with any other Internet protocol: * of similar complexity * with a similar record of interoperability problems between various clients and servers * that has this evolutionary trend of evolving, changing, and mutating, while still carrying the same same version number Some IMAP clients certainly do have problems with the Courier-IMAP server, from time to time. Crispin always blames Courier-IMAP But, it's just as true that some clients will also have a problem with the UW-IMAP server. It won't take a long time to find published reports of interoperability issues between the UW-IMAP server and some mail clients. My position is that the fault for this lies squarely on the specification. You can take SMTP, or POP3, or IRC, or most any other wire protocol; and have a fairly good chance of having your end result work, more or less, with other software. The same cannot be said for IMAP To have any reasonable chance of coming up with a working client or server, it is always necessary to use a working counterpart, and examine its input or output in order to figure out how IMAP's supposed to work.
It's quite obvious to see how some cookies got frosted over this. I also learned (via other channels) of a few lame attempts lobby this rogue Internet provider into changing their mind. I note that the original party line was that the UW-IMAP server is the only well-written IMAP server in world (and the only well-written IMAP mail reader is pine). Recently (and probably because of the recent developments with this ISP), both UW-IMAP and Cyrus are now officially blessed; the apparent goal is a tactical decision to steer people away to these two servers, and away from the uppity Courier.
I get the impression that my occasional kind words about UW-IMAP really annoy some people, who are incapable of saying anything nice about Courier, no matter how true it might be.
|