[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kc-kde
Subject:    [kc-kde] [SUM: #68] Kontact: KMail part preloading [kde-cvs]
From:       "Peter Rockai (mornfall)" <mornfall () logisys ! dyndns ! org>
Date:       2003-11-14 17:28:35
[Download RAW message or body]

Hello!

I summarise this thread (kontact), even if it happened on kde-cvs. For 
explanation of kde-cvs handling, see intro (should be in cvs by the time you 
read it - just update your kckde module, and see kdetraf-68/01-intro.xml). I 
think i will send the intro to the list as well, but somewhat later.

Cheers.

PS: It was spellchecked and poster errors were carefully preserved ;p.

-- 
Peter Rockai (mornfall), mornfall()logisys!dyndns!org, mornfall.homeip.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
He says gods like to see an atheist around. Gives them something to aim at.
                       -- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)

["13-kontact-preload.xml" (text/xml)]

<section
	title="Kontact: KMail part preloading [kde-cvs]"
	subject="kontact"
	author="Peter Rockai (mornfall)"
	contact="mailto:mornfall@logisys.dyndns.org"
	posts="14"
	startdate="09 November 2003 23:40:12"
	enddate="10 November 2003 17:01:33">

	<topic>Kontact</topic>
	<topic>KMail</topic>
	<topic>PIM</topic>
	<mention>David Faure</mention>
	<mention>Ingo Klöcker</mention>

	<p>Whole thread started when Daniel committed some code to kontact: <quote
			who="Daniel Molkentin">Preload certain plugins entirely. Currently
			only kmail does this.  This will allow to fix at least the summary
			view and the "summaryview has no valid "new" action" bug.</quote>.
		Cornelius, with a raised eyebrow, asked <quote
			who="Cornelius Schumacher">Does that mean that the KMail part is
			now always loaded on startup of Kontact?</quote>.</p>

	<p>Both Ingo and Daniel confirmed his suspicion. Daniel commented: <quote
			who="Daniel Molkentin">Right. That's what I discussed with Ingo
			and Till, and I see no other way around that. Wouldn't it look odd
			to you if you start you fully integrated PIM suite where you told
			the kmail part to fetch mails and it won't, because it's not
			loaded? Upps. Until KMail has not been properly splitted into libs
			/ DCOP services. I see no better way. Otherwise we face a big
			usability problem and some bugs cannot be solved either (see my
			commit).</quote>. Cornelius, quite upset by the time, remarked
		ironically: <quote who="Cornelius Schumacher">So we are finally back
			to the monolithic monster app we promised not to write? What about
			removing the KMail summary view? I never understood what it should
			be good for anyway...</quote>. Daniel tried to calm him down a
		bit, stating this was only temporary workaround and will be fixed
		after kmail gets properly splitted (see above). However, this was not
		enough for brave Cornelius, who, still with ironical grin,
		replied:</p>

	<quote who="Cornelius Schumacher">
		
		<p>What's the point in retreiving mails before you have a GUI to
			actually read them? You don't start standalone-KMail in the
			background for retreiving mails on login either, do you?</p>

		<p>In my point of view this at least has to be an option, if we want
			it at all. One very important point about Kontact is that
			applications are only started when needed so that we don't create
			the big memory-hogging monster app we always were make fun of when
			we talked about Evolution or Outlook. That mails aren't retreived
			before selecting the KMail part for the first time I can hardly
			recognize as a bug. This will only give the experience of Kontact
			being slow. Do you really want that?</p></quote>

	<p>This generated some more responses, pointing out korn (which Cornelius
		promptly used to make Kontact Mail summary look redundant) and raising
		the issue of KMail split once again (this time David stating, that
		KMail should provide part for checking email without GUI). This was
		enough for Daniel, who mumbled <quote who="Daniel Molkentin">Yes,
			<u>should</u>. And herein lies the problem. I hope we can solve
			this for the after-3.2-release, but the KMail guys decided to
			delay that, and we have to cope with that now.</quote>. This led
		to Zack replying with no less irony than Cornelius:</p>

	<quote who="Zack Rusin">

		<p>You make it sound like we've made a silly choice. Split of the
			core is not something we could do without breaking stuff. It seems
			people view it as a three step operation:</p>
	
		<ol>
			<li>split core,</li>
			<li>make kmail awesome,</li>
			<li>go get cookies.</li>
		</ol>

		<p>It's not like KMail 3.2 is lacking in the new features department. It 
			will come, just wait a bit.</p></quote>

	<p>This made Daniel apologize to KMail developers (while he didn't mean it
		as offence, apologizing never killed anyone whom i knew, so it was
		probably right thing to do). Here the thread ended, with angry
		Cornelius mumbling in the corner (or maybe he coped and forgiven
		Daniel and the others).</p>

</section>


_______________________________________________
kc-kde mailing list
kc-kde@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kc-kde


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]