First sentence on the first hit when searching for “Gmail smtp imap”:
For non-Gmail clients, Gmail supports the standard IMAP, POP, and SMTP protocols.
https://developers.google.com/gmail/imap/imap-smtp
What you’re referring to is the fact that GMail has apparently disabled authentication using username + password for SMTP/IMAP. I would assume that application passwords still work fine as a workaround, even if they don’t mention it specifically.
Okay, fairy nuff.
In that case, I would probably start with writing an SMTP or IMAP proxy first. It will teach you everything you need to know about the protocols, and you can reverse engineer the protocols using a client that already works.
It would give you a tangible project outline, which I believe is often critical to not lose motivation or interest.
If you accept using libraries, there’s the imap crate, the mail_send crate, and samotoo crate that are worth looking at.
I think you’re misguided about the APIs. Gmail supports IMAP and SMTP. Proton supports those too if you run an encryption bridge on your computer. Fastmail supports IMAP/JMAP/SMTP (they invented JMAP to try and innovate).
Email providers most likely must provide SMTP and IMAP due to compatibility requirements with Apple Mail and other clients.
Email is ridiculously complex—the technology is dead simple, but the number of exceptions and (undocumented) rules you need to abide by or risk getting banned by half the internet without being told is nothing to sneeze at.
I should know: I have built multiple support platforms that worked through email (amongst other channels).
You mention wanting to start at the SMTP level, and then building a Qt interface. So you’re going to write an SMTP client, an IMAP/POP3/JMAP client, a storage engine, a user interface, and a better search system, all on your own? You’re describing a gargantuan task.
No offense, but each one of those could be a project on its own. You probably think they’re all simple tasks (they’re not), and that you can follow a few RFCs to get things going (you can’t), and that it’ll be easy to debug (it won’t). Finally, I think you’re underestimating how large people’s email maps get.
Why not write a plugin for Thunderbird that improves the search?
You didn’t get laid off because you discussed your wages.
You were laid off because you couldn’t keep your cards close to your chest and told the company y’all had been discussing wages.
Having the right to discuss it doesn’t mean you should do it in front of the boss.
In Denmark, I’m part of a union which publishes salary stats for every possible job title, management responsibility, education, in a fairly convoluted matrix. Still, this allows me to easily negotiate with companies and see how well they pay. There might be something organised by the government, but I’ve never had a need for it.
Germany has a principle of equal treatment. The only way to ensure this is respected is to discuss wages. There is a legal precedent that makes it completely unambiguous that discussing wages is protected. It may be uncomfortable, but that’s just social pressure, encouraged by companies.
You cannot prevent your employees from discussing wages. It is literally illegal to do so, and you cannot reprimand people for doing so.
Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the Act), employees have the right to communicate with their coworkers about their wages, as well as with labor organizations, worker centers, the media, and the public. Wages are a vital term and condition of employment, and discussions of wages are often preliminary to organizing or other actions for mutual aid or protection.
If you are an employee covered by the Act, you may discuss wages in face-to-face conversations, over the phone, and in written messages. Policies that specifically prohibit the discussion of wages are unlawful as are policies that chill employees from discussing their wages.
You may have discussions about wages when not at work, when you are on break, and even during work if employees are permitted to have other non-work conversations. You have these rights whether or not you are represented by a union.
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-rights/your-rights-to-discuss-wages
Pedantic moment: “every business’ focus”, or “all businesses’ focus”, but not “every businesses’ focus”.
The irony is that Reddit thinks their internal search can in any way, shape or form compete with Google or other actual search engines. People use Google to find stuff on Reddit because Reddit’s own search is hopeless.
If you were to show this comment to someone 10-20 years ago you would have blown their mind:
The simple fact that buying a $300 device and to “not expect software updates” is not considered a scam is hilarious to me.