IMAP back end

[Lukas Pirl]

On 11/27/2014 07:42 AM, Daira Hopwood wrote:
> 
> I don't think that's a particularly good fit. The existing backends
> assume a storage system that can store data at arbitrary keys; IMAP
> can't do that, since message UIDs are 32-bit integers. (You could
> maybe hack this using mailbox names as keys, but that still seems
> like a bad fit.)
> 

Hello Daira,

my motivation to propose this was mostly reasoned by all the existing
IMAP infrastructures rather than the technological fitness. But thanks
for investigating and providing this interesting detail.
You think it would be that hacky? I mean Tahoe is doing it quite similar
on disk IIRC. The keys could be split by groups of 5 (or 4) and it
should be fine. Anyways - nobody seems to be willing to hack this at the
moment ;)

Best,

Lukas