I figure this is worth a shot, given that this blog is hosted on a sister application.
To the developers working on Gmail: I would like to know your position on comment #3 in flameeyes's post from a Claws-Mail developer. Are you or are you not following the IMAP specification in this respect? If not, why not? Additionally, can it be fixed?
I, like many people on the Internets, was ecstatic at the announcements of IMAP for Gmail and the blogosphere-dubbed "Gmail 2.0". I'm all for a faster Gmail experience, not to mention an implementation of the mail retrieval protocol that was developed at my alma mater. However, my enthusiasm waned in two parts, when I actually tried out these features.
When IMAP was finally enabled on my account, I opened up claws-mail and configured it to use Gmail as its mail source. When it did the mail sync operation, I noticed that it didn't populate the virtual "label" folders properly. By that point, I gave up and did something else. I learned later during my blog reading that Gentoo's flameeyes had the same problem. If you look at the comments, you'll see that Claws-Mails's developers have acknowledged the problem as Google's fault. As a(n annoyed) developer, I would agree with their assessment. As a pragmatic developer, however, I agree with flameeyes's assessment: The Claws-Mails developers should follow Postel's Law.
Part two: trying out "Gmail 2.0". Regardless of how I feel about the blogosphere's echo chamber (and by extension, the mainstream media's echo chamber), I'm using that term for it because it's convenient. Yeah, it's a cop-out. Anyway, this refactoring of Gmail's dynamic JavaScript engine seems to me, to be a step back, in terms of speed (or at least, perceived speed). Sometimes when I change tabs back to Gmail, the message list column is squeezed horizontally, as if I changed my browser window size to 200x900. When I change label views, there tends to be a lapse between unloading the old label's mail and loading the new label's mail. This leaves a big green box in the interim.
I do realize that these features are relatively new, but you'd think user/unit testing would catch these things.
Posts
All Comments
