[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: cyrus-info
Subject: ANNOTATEMORE => METADATA and rfc 5464
From: lists () egidy ! de (Gerd v ! Egidy)
Date: 2009-11-18 12:21:07
Message-ID: 200911181321.07900.lists () egidy ! de
[Download RAW message or body]
Hi Bron,
thanks for looking into the annotation/metadata stuff.
> So I'm thinking: create a new metadata.db, require a conversion on upgrade
> from annotations.db. I had a look, and none of our servers had ANY
> annotations until I added a /comment to my INBOX for testing.
Just to be sure: do you plan to change the current annotatemore-code so that
it will access the new database and an old client still using annotatemore
will still work?
> Does anybody out there use annotations much? Does anybody know any code
> that would be broken by changing the way annotations are done?
Given that there is code to convert the old annotations.db to metadata.db I
don't see any problems for us. Our backup code will probably need some
tweaking, but when the new db format is more sane than the current mess I
don't see any problems with that.
Kind regards,
Gerd
--
Address (better: trap) for people I really don't want to get mail from:
jonas at cactusamerica.com
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic