[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: OT: Courier vs Binc ?

To: qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: OT: Courier vs Binc ?
From: Andy Gayton <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:42:39 +1000
Delivered-to: de5-qmail@sws5.ornl.gov
Delivered-to: mailing list qmail@list.cr.yp.to
In-reply-to: <20050302190511.GO4511@Space.Net>
Mailing-list: contact qmail-help@list.cr.yp.to; run by ezmlm
References: <35333.201.139.0.190.1109728313.squirrel@linux.unam.mx> <924f2928050301184054a7049d@mail.gmail.com> <200503021131.05461.ar-djblists@nwdb.co.uk> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0503020740160.21013@distort> <20050302190511.GO4511@Space.Net>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910

asierra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

How is binc compared with courier? Experiences?

Binc is a seemless fit for qmail/pop3d. Binc concentrates on just being a great imap server - and doesn't attempt to also provide pop3, virtual accounts, its own authentication mechanism or another smtp server.

The following link extends lifewithqmail to give you a qmail/pop3/imap setup that feels like a coherent whole. In particular it has a modified qmailctl that controls all three:

http://lifewithbincimap.org/index.php/Main/LifeWithBincIMAP

Markus Stumpf wrote:

What would be a nice to have, however, are group functions like shared
folders and/or SIEVE support.


Shared folders and quota support are scheduled:
http://lifewithbincimap.org/index.php/Main/WhatsPlannedForTheFuture

Go Andreas :)

Andy.

References:
- OT: Courier vs Binc ?
  - From: asierra
- Re: OT: Courier vs Binc ?
  - From: Jason Frisvold
- Re: OT: Courier vs Binc ?
  - From: Andrew Richards
- Re: OT: Courier vs Binc ?
  - From: brian
- Re: OT: Courier vs Binc ?
  - From: Markus Stumpf

Prev by Date: Re: To supervise or to not supervise?
Next by Date: RE: To supervise or to not supervise?
Previous by thread: [BRe: OT: Courier vs Binc ?
Next by thread: Re: OT: Courier vs Binc ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread