Subject: [lemonade] Future Release in LEMONADE Profile bis?

From: "Vaudreuil, Greg M \(Greg\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:53:07 -0500

I reviewed the minutes and list, but don't see clearly if we agreed that
future-release was to be included in the Ph-2 LEMONADE profile.  There
was plenty of debate as to whether the extension should be worked as a
formal WG item or not, with a flip-flop-flip in the history.  That
document is now done, RFC 4865.

I'd like to suggest that future-release is included in Profile-BIS.  It
is a simple extension with high utility to a diverse client, especially
with intermittent connectivity or subject to unforseen battery
exhaustion.  In general, fewer options are better than more, and this is
an extension I expect to be widely implemented regardless of whether it
is in LEMONADE or not.  Not including simply requires supporting another
code-path in the client and another diverse user experience :-(

Greg V.

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade
Supplemental Web Site:
http://www.standardstrack.com/ietf/lemonade

---

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 13:35:11 -0700

I don't see it that way, unless one is creating a "Lemonade client" that
does not follow standard IMAP and assumes features are there, and thus
Future Delivery, if not in the Profile, is clearly a weird thing.

If one creates clients that happen to implement lemonade, and they want to
do future delivery, they just do future delivery.

What could possibly go wrong?

> code-path in the client and another diverse user experience :-(

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.

---

From: "Vaudreuil, Greg M \(Greg\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 08:33:22 -0500

Well.... the point of lemonade was to create a profile with a new
minimum-to-implement set of features that client could assume.  The idea
as I understood it was a client could get "skinny" by assuming either
base IMAP or LEMONADE IMAP.  By having two distinct levels of
functionality, one could simplify both the user experience and the code
by eliminating or significantly reducing expensive "options".

The cost of not doing so is that this is one more "option" that may or
may not be present.  Most annoyingly, the presence of this option can be
known at composition time only by more icky client configuration or a
client caching the capabilities of the submission server from the last
connect.

If this is the model, I'd like to include Future Release in that higher
functional tier.

Greg V.

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Burger [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 4:35 PM
To: Vaudreuil, Greg M (Greg)
Cc: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service
enivronments
Subject: Re: [lemonade] Future Release in LEMONADE Profile bis?

If one creates clients that happen to implement lemonade, and they want
to
do future delivery, they just do future delivery.

On 6/26/07 1:53 PM, "Vaudreuil, Greg M (Greg)"
<[email-masked]>

> code-path in the client and another diverse user experience :-(

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated
entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.