Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 7, 2022. It is now read-only.

Comparison with offlineimap #19

Open
wilhelmy opened this issue Apr 27, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

Comparison with offlineimap #19

wilhelmy opened this issue Apr 27, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@wilhelmy
Copy link

I'm currently trying to decide between offlineimap, imapfw and mbsync/isync.

As such, a comparison between all three of them would be nice to help people decide, but is probably out of scope here - but since you're familiar with at least offlineimap and imapfw and slightly competing against your previous stable software here: how does offlineimap compare to imapfw, and what's the status, what's supported by each one of them and what isn't, and so on. Is there an overview somewhere?

@nicolas33
Copy link
Member

imapfw is definitely not ready. It's still very early stage.

For a full comparison between offlineimap and mbsync I have no idea and I'm not aware of something like that available on the web.

Some users have more success with offlineimap, some other with mbsync. I've read comments that users tend to find that mbsync is faster than offlineimap. OTOH, offlineimap is more flexible.

You might like to try both.

@kimim
Copy link

kimim commented Mar 15, 2019

I found offlineimap is better that it support Windows. I cannot make mbsync to support Windows.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants