Re: Considering reverting imaplib2.py and IDLE support - need feedback

[Mike Dawson <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Folks,

I'm currently running an offlineimap syncing between 5 and 20 mailboxes 
running on a server on our LAN - and a few times there is something that 
crashes.  Sometimes this is not offlineimap's fault - the connection 
goes down, someone changed their password etc. 

The problem IMO is that as soon as one thing crashes normally the whole 
process dies.  I am at the moment trying to apply the hacks that I made 
to an older version to the git version to provide support for only 
syncing the last x days of mail and for excluding messages above a 
certain size. 

After that I would be interested in making a patch to provide some 
exception handling / logging - e.g. if copying message x has an 
exception, log it, maybe even generate a message in the box being synced 
about the error, and continue... 

I think idle support is a really important thing to have and was 
something that mail addicts really appreciate - I mean having to wait 
for the sync to get your spam makes some people twitch.

Regards,

-Mike

Tim Gray wrote:
> On Sun  9, Aug'09 at  5:11 PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
>   
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Patch 3847d0ba9 introduced IMAP IDLE support, and with it switched from
>> Python's built-in imaplib.py to imaplib2.py.  I have received numerous
>> reports of all sorts of hanging and crashing bugs new to 6.1.0, and
>> believe that they are attributable to this change.
>>     
>
> I've been using IDLE since it was put in the code base on two boxes 
> concurrently and it's been great.  I've not had any problems with IDLE.
>
>
>