ANNOTATEMORE => METADATA and rfc 5464

[Ken Murchison]

What is your new format proposal?


Bron Gondwana wrote:
> I'm in the process of implementing rfc 5464, which is what the
> ANNOTATEMORE drafts turned into.
> 
> Unfortunately, Cyrus' support is an early draft, before the paths
> to everything were changed and the commands were renamed.  It would
> be great to be complient, and there is software out there like Kolab
> which would benefit from it.
> 
> Also, the database format is pretty nasty - complete with nulls
> embedded in keys and other fun stuff (like platform dependent type
> lengths codified in the format, ick)
> 
> So I'm thinking: create a new metadata.db, require a conversion on upgrade
> from annotations.db.  I had a look, and none of our servers had ANY
> annotations until I added a /comment to my INBOX for testing.
> 
> Does anybody out there use annotations much?  Does anybody know any code
> that would be broken by changing the way annotations are done?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bron.
> 

-- 
Kenneth Murchison
Systems Programmer
Carnegie Mellon University