Welcome to Soft32 Linux Forums!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Bug#405762: no maildir support

 
   Soft32 Home -> Linux2 Arch -> Bugs Dist RSS
Next:  Bug#334231: Same over here for more than a year  
Author Message
Joey Hess

External


Since: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 61



(Msg. 1) Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:40 pm
Post subject: Bug#405762: no maildir support
Archived from groups: linux>debian>bugs>dist (more info?)

Package: alpine
Version: 0.81+dfsg-1
Severity: normal

alpine seems to not see my ~/Maildir, I guess it's build w/o maildir
support. Debian's pine is patched with a maildir patch that works ok,
for alpine to replace pine here it will need maildir support.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.16-2-xen-k7
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-Cool

Versions of packages alpine depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.6.ds1-9 GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii libldap2 2.1.30-13.2 OpenLDAP libraries
ii libncurses5 5.5-5 Shared libraries for terminal hand
ii libpam0g 0.79-4 Pluggable Authentication Modules l
ii libssl0.9.8 0.9.8c-4 SSL shared libraries

alpine recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

--
see shy jo
Back to top
Login to vote
Asheesh Laroia

External


Since: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 30



(Msg. 2) Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 3:40 am
Post subject: Bug#405762: no maildir support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

X-Debbugs-CC: chappa DeleteThis @math.washington.edu

Eduardo, I see that you have an Alpine Maildir patch at
http://staff.washington.edu/chappa/alpine/info/maildir.html . Do you have
any comment as to if it's suitable to include it into the Debian Alpine
package?

It seems that the washington.edu have reasons of correctness against
writing their own. Also, do you know if the author of this Maildir patch
is willing to allow Debian to redistribute his patch under the Apache
License 2.0?

Thanks!

-- Asheesh.

--
Q: How much does it cost to ride the Unibus?
A: 2 bits.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Eduardo Chappa

External


Since: Mar 07, 2007
Posts: 1



(Msg. 3) Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:50 am
Post subject: Bug#405762: no maildir support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

*** Asheesh Laroia (asheesh@asheesh.org) wrote today:

Smile Eduardo, I see that you have an Alpine Maildir patch at
Smile http://staff.washington.edu/chappa/alpine/info/maildir.html . Do you
Smile have any comment as to if it's suitable to include it into the Debian
Smile Alpine package?

Dear Assheesh,

Thank you for your message. To be honest, I do not know the answer to
your question, in terms of the following issues.

* I do not have knowledge of anybody testing it in "pure" debian. I know
some people have tried it in things like potato, etc. They even
distribute it. So, I do not know how well it works in Debian, or if it
needs a special tuning.

* I do not know if Debian would force me to distribute my patch under a
specific license. I myself do not care what people do with the patch
as long as they don't claim ownership. I am happy to provide support
for it. I just don't want it to be under an imposed license.

* I am the author of the patch. It is based on old versions of the patch
(e.g. the one Debian distributes, or Suse used to distribute), but it
is completely different now. It has so many ways to configure it. The
one thing it is missing is UID support for IMAP. This is a big
shortcoming, in my opinion, and I am working on it. Having said this,
for local access it is great. The patch that Debian distributes has
UID support, but lacks other features and it is very unstable.

Smile It seems that the washington.edu have reasons of correctness against
Smile writing their own. Also, do you know if the author of this Maildir
Smile patch is willing to allow Debian to redistribute his patch under the
Smile Apache License 2.0?

As far as my reading of the license goes, all I ask about license is
compatible and allowed under the Apache 2.0 License; but I do not want my
work to be under such license.

I want to make sure also that you understand that this message represents
my personal opinion and solely my opinion. It is not meant to represent
the opinion of the (Al)Pine team, nor the University of Washington, or the
Department of Mathematics at the University of Washington. I owe in
gratitude to the University of Washington and its people more than I can
repay in any way.

--
Eduardo
http://staff.washington.edu/chappa/alpine/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Asheesh Laroia

External


Since: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 30



(Msg. 4) Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:00 am
Post subject: Bug#405762: no maildir support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eduardo Chappa wrote:

> *** Asheesh Laroia (asheesh@asheesh.org) wrote today:
>
> Smile Eduardo, I see that you have an Alpine Maildir patch at
> Smile http://staff.washington.edu/chappa/alpine/info/maildir.html . Do you
> Smile have any comment as to if it's suitable to include it into the Debian
> Smile Alpine package?
>
> Dear Assheesh,
>
> Thank you for your message. To be honest, I do not know the answer to
> your question, in terms of the following issues.
>
> * I do not have knowledge of anybody testing it in "pure" debian. I know
> some people have tried it in things like potato, etc. They even
> distribute it. So, I do not know how well it works in Debian, or if it
> needs a special tuning.

That's something I can look into; don't worry about the Debian-specific
customizations, if any, that may be needed. (I doubt any will be.)

> * I do not know if Debian would force me to distribute my patch under a
> specific license. I myself do not care what people do with the patch
> as long as they don't claim ownership. I am happy to provide support
> for it. I just don't want it to be under an imposed license.

As the package maintainer, it's my responsibility to make sure that Debian
distributes only code that is legal to distribute (and that is Free
Software). We would not claim ownership, and I would make it clear in the
documentation that it includes your Maildir patch.

> * I am the author of the patch. It is based on old versions of the patch
> (e.g. the one Debian distributes, or Suse used to distribute), but it
> is completely different now. It has so many ways to configure it. The
> one thing it is missing is UID support for IMAP. This is a big
> shortcoming, in my opinion, and I am working on it. Having said this,
> for local access it is great. The patch that Debian distributes has
> UID support, but lacks other features and it is very unstable.
>
> Smile It seems that the washington.edu have reasons of correctness against
> Smile writing their own. Also, do you know if the author of this Maildir
> Smile patch is willing to allow Debian to redistribute his patch under the
> Smile Apache License 2.0?
>
> As far as my reading of the license goes, all I ask about license is
> compatible and allowed under the Apache 2.0 License; but I do not want my
> work to be under such license.

Because we'll be distributing copies of the patch, I want to make sure
that we are allowed to. You seem to have said that (a) the patch is your
work (meaning, you also hold the copyright to the work), and (b) that you
are willing to allow people to share changes in a fairly liberal way.

I don't understand what you mean by "an imposed license". The great thing
about copyright is that you can let different folk use your work under
different license terms. This means that if you let us Debian guys use it
under an Apache 2.0 license, then later on you want to let other people
use your work under some different license, you are allowed to do that.
All you can't do is revoke our license.

Does that make sense? It sounds like you'd be happy to let us include the
patch, and it sounds like our users would be well-served if we were to.
I would be most comfortable if you said, "Asheesh, you are allowed to use
and redistribute this patch under the same terms as Alpine," and I hope
you understand that saying that doesn't limit your rights to let everyone
else use it under even more liberal terms than the Apache 2.0 License that
Alpine itself is under.

So how can I get you to say the quoted sentence? (-:

> I want to make sure also that you understand that this message represents
> my personal opinion and solely my opinion. It is not meant to represent
> the opinion of the (Al)Pine team, nor the University of Washington, or the
> Department of Mathematics at the University of Washington. I owe in
> gratitude to the University of Washington and its people more than I can
> repay in any way.

Thanks for making that clear. (-:

-- Asheesh.

--
Q: What's a WASP's idea of open-mindedness?
A: Dating a Canadian.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
Asheesh Laroia

External


Since: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 30



(Msg. 5) Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:40 pm
Post subject: Bug#405762: no maildir support [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eduardo Chappa wrote:

> * I do not know if Debian would force me to distribute my patch under a
> specific license. I myself do not care what people do with the patch
> as long as they don't claim ownership. I am happy to provide support
> for it. I just don't want it to be under an imposed license.
>
> * I am the author of the patch. It is based on old versions of the patch
> (e.g. the one Debian distributes, or Suse used to distribute), but it
> is completely different now. It has so many ways to configure it. The
> one thing it is missing is UID support for IMAP. This is a big
> shortcoming, in my opinion, and I am working on it. Having said this,
> for local access it is great. The patch that Debian distributes has
> UID support, but lacks other features and it is very unstable.

It would be more convenient for us if you wrote, "Asheesh, you are allowed
to use and redistribute this patch under the same terms as Alpine."

Given both (a) you are the author of the patch, and (b) you wrote above
that you don't care what people do with it so long as they don't claim
they wrote the patch, I think we might be okay to distribute your patch.
If you won't be explicit about letting us use it with the same terms as
Alpine itself (the Apache 2.0 License), then I can try to get advice on
this from more experienced/legal-minded people in Debian.

No matter what, if we include your patch, we'll always mention the
original author of the patch (you!) in debian/copyright, and we'll
probably also mention you in README.Debian.

I would really prefer it if you just wrote the sentence above beginning
with "Asheesh, you are allowed...". It's no harm to you and it makes my
end of the process easier.

And by the way, thanks for all the work you've done for the PINE community
in the past!

-- Asheesh.

--
For the fashion of Minas Tirith was such that it was built on seven levels,
each delved into a hill, and about each was set a wall, and in each wall
was a gate.
-- J.R.R. Tolkien, "The Return of the King"

[Quoted in "VMS Internals and Data Structures", V4.4, when
referring to system overview.]



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
Back to top
Login to vote
swajime




Joined: Jun 07, 2008
Posts: 1



(Msg. 6) Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2008 7:49 am
Post subject: To Edwardo rg centOS4.6 & Alpine Maildirs Patch [Login to view extended thread Info.]

I've found and successfully installed Alpine for centOS4.6, via the helpful post at http://www.centos.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=13650#forumpost47255
and now I need the Maildirs patch, but I cannot find an rpm for it.

How can I apply the patch (alpine was not installed via src)?

john
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
Bug#405762: Maildir support - Joey Hess filed a bug in the Debian package (*) about Alpine lacking support for the Maildir mail storage format. ..

Bug#419946: mutt gets confused when a message dissapears f.. - Package: mutt Version: 1.5.13-3 Severity: normal I use offlineimap to keep multiple computers in sync with a remote..

Bug#402385: mailutils: sieve deletes mail after fileinto f.. - Package: mailutils Version: 1:0.6.1-4sarge2 Severity: normal I have a recipe that should move certain mailing list..

Bug#408296: kmail: deleting maildir does not delete associ.. - Package: kmail Version: 4:3.5.5.dfsg.1-6 Severity: normal This bug is also reported at the bugs.kde.org site:..

Bug#415623: sylpheed: ..does not open Maildir, even after .. - Package: sylpheed Version: 2.3.0~beta5-1 Severity: normal ....this is a duplicate bug report, this bug is present in....

Bug#415622: sylpheed-gtk1: ..does not open Maildir, even a.. - Package: sylpheed-gtk1 Version: 1.0.6-4 Severity: normal ....I'm a Maildir guy, my inbox usually has an handful of..
       Soft32 Home -> Linux2 Arch -> Bugs Dist All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Page 1 of 1

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Categories:
 Windows
 Linux
 Mac
 PDA


[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]