Can mutt be persuaded to use a sensible maildir hierarchy?

[Chris Green]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:11:24PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 05:46:53PM +0100, Chris Green wrote:
> > Does mutt still use the (IMHO silly) maildir hierarchy where mail
> > 'folders' are simply represented by another '.' and name in the
> > maildir directory name?
> 
> I'm not sure why you think Mutt is doing this...  I have my maildir
> folders set up in exactly the way you say you want and they work fine.
> But Mutt, by and large, isn't what created that mailbox structure--it
> was procmail.  Presumably it's also true for you that whatever is
> delivering your mail is creating the directory structure, and mutt is
> just consuming it.
> 
Yes, true enough, and your reply encourages me to try again.
"Whatever is delivering your mail" in my case is my own Python filter
script that receives mail via ~/.forward so that's easy enough to make
do the right thing (I think!).

I think I may previously have tried with other delivery agents which
use the maildir++ format.

Thanks!

-- 
Chris Green