Timo Sirainen, on 5/21/2007 8:54 AM, said the following: <snip>> Upcoming v1.1 features, more or less implemented in this order:<snip> Hey Timo, I'm loving all of the new functionality - especially the full support for Shared mailboxes and ACLs... but... I don't see any mention of support for SiS (single-instance-storage) as discussed previously on the list, even for upcoming 1.2/2.0 Did this fall through a crack? Or did you decide it was going to be too difficult for the time being? I'd dearly like to get this working, at least for email attachments... Thanks for your consideration, and thanks so much for dovecot! -- Best regards, Charles
On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 18:56 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:> I don't see any mention of support for SiS (single-instance-storage) as > discussed previously on the list, even for upcoming 1.2/2.0 > > Did this fall through a crack? Or did you decide it was going to be too > difficult for the time being?dbox-file.h contains: /* Pointer to external message data. Format is: 1*(<start offset> <byte count> <ref>) */ DBOX_METADATA_EXT_REF = 'P', That's about all there exists of that feature :) I haven't given up on implementing that, but for now there have been more important things. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20071202/b3246c52/attachment-0002.bin>
On 12/2/2007, Timo Sirainen (tss at iki.fi) wrote:> On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 18:56 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote: >> I don't see any mention of support for SiS >> (single-instance-storage) as discussed previously on the list, even >> for upcoming 1.2/2.0 >> >> Did this fall through a crack? Or did you decide it was going to be >> too difficult for the time being?> dbox-file.h contains: > > /* Pointer to external message data. Format is: > 1*(<start offset> <byte count> <ref>) */ > DBOX_METADATA_EXT_REF = 'P', > > That's about all there exists of that feature :) I haven't given up > on implementing that, but for now there have been more important > things.Fair enough... but since this one is near and dear to my heart ;) Do you have any idea as to a time frame for when you might be able to get to it? Are you thinking post v2.0? Even 2.1 or 3.0? I know its a hard question to answer, so if you just have no idea, thats ok too... Thanks again - -- Best regards, Charles