4 ms·

Do you see anything that should (or could) be done via IMAP but not via JMAP? Adding support for higher level operations to the protocol can be worth the comple

• flukus 7y ago
  > Not everyone is lucky enough to have a reliable, fast, low latency link to his IMAP server. This is a protocol from the 80's, I'm sure it doesn't require anything we'd consider a fast connection today, latency may have changed though, mail servers used to be geographically closer. > Adding support for higher level operations to the protocol can be worth the complexity if it removes network roundtrips. It also benefits SaaS providers by having the complexity on their end and potentially limits apps. In my example of "collapseThreads" why does this need to be an option at all instead of something like "parentId" and leaving it up to the client? More features also means more ways to abuse them, imagine google saying "yes we support JMAP in gmail" then ignoring certain features.
  • afiori 7y ago
    > This is a protocol from the 80's, I'm sure it doesn't require anything we'd consider a fast connection today, But it does require long lasting stable connections, which is what you want to avoid on a mobile that tries to connect for only a few second at a time and the go back to low-power mode.