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

List:       kde-pim
Subject:    Re: [Kde-pim] Review Request: Migrate KMail's "Include in manual
From:       "Kevin Krammer" <kevin.krammer () gmx ! at>
Date:       2010-06-10 15:15:21
Message-ID: 20100610151521.27259.46603 () localhost
[Download RAW message or body]



> On 2010-06-08 17:44:49, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > What would a resource specific setting like "check on startup" mean. On startup \
> > of what? On startup of the resource (which runs in the background)? Or on startup \
> > of the first user visible application, e.g. a new mail notifier or some mail \
> > client? 
> > As resource specific setting really only the first interpretation makes any sense \
> > and I would be in favor of such a setting. 
> > If background checking is enabled (i.e. checking regardless of whether KMail is \
> > not running; see the recent thread on kde-pim about this) then a KMail specific \
> > setting doesn't make any sense. OTOH, if background checking is disabled then it \
> > does make some sense. Maybe it should still be a resource specific setting and \
> > the interpretation would depend on the status of the background checking option.
> 
> Kevin Krammer wrote:
> I thought about it as a KMail specific treatment per resource.
> 
> What the resources do when they startup is totally up to their configuration and \
> collection cache policies. 
> However, KMail might want to keep the functionality of explicitly synchronize \
> resources when it starts, in case resources are not configured for interval check \
> or have long intervals. 
> Similar in how "include in manual checks" is KMail specific treatment of certain \
> resources. The check on startup is IMHO like a manual check where the manual \
> trigger is the launch of KMail.

I've committed the non-gui parts, i.e. kmkernel.cpp and kmailmigrator.cpp

Casey is having a look at the GUI parts, so I am closing this request.


- Kevin


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/4257/#review6038
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2010-06-08 16:28:24, Kevin Krammer wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/4257/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2010-06-08 16:28:24)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE PIM.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> KMail1 has the option to configure whether an account should be part of a mail \
> check triggered through UI. 
> The patch adds the checkbox below the resource list on the receiving accounts tab, \
> changing it according to selection. Defaulting to true/checked in case there is no \
> setting for a resource yet. 
> We could also make "check on startup" a resource specific setting, right now the \
> visual grouping on the same frame as the resource list suggests that already. 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
> /trunk/KDE/kdepim/kmail/configuredialog.cpp 1136001 
> /trunk/KDE/kdepim/kmail/configuredialog_p.h 1136001 
> /trunk/KDE/kdepim/kmail/kmkernel.cpp 1136001 
> /trunk/KDE/kdepim/kmail/ui/accountspagereceivingtab.ui 1136001 
> /trunk/KDE/kdepim/runtime/migration/kmail/kmailmigrator.cpp 1136001 
> 
> Diff: http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/4257/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kevin
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/


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