Re: CVS archive status?

[Simon Josefsson <jas@pdc.kth.se>]

Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> writes:

> > Since nnimap is part of gnus, perhaps we should close this list and
> > discuss future development on the ding list?  Most of the future
> > IMAP-related enhancement will have little to do with nnimap (they
> > will be in the Gnus realm) so that would make sense.
> 
> True, most discussions now belong on the ding list, but you may wish
> to leave the list in place to have a place to move lengthy discussions
> about imap client interoperability issues into...?

You're right, there'll always be IMAP issues worth discussing that
might not be suitable on ding.

On just that topic; would a option that disabled the 'Checking mailbox
foo' messages and used the information available when splitting
articles be useful?  It would mean that mailboxes that mail wasn't
splitted into would get a star ("*") in the group buffer, but no other
harm.

Since IMAP hasn't a efficient way of getting the highest article
number in a mailbox, perhaps Gnus should do what other IMAP clients
do, ie not saying anything about the number of articles (unread nor
total) in a mailbox before one has entered it for the first time?

The lengthy 'Checking mailbox foo' are just for fetching that number,
so a big performance gain would be made...

Hm. I'll think I'll implement it and see how it works..