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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Feature request?
From:       JW <jw () centraltexasit ! com>
Date:       2002-01-26 23:34:10
[Download RAW message or body]

At 10:16 PM 1/26/2002 +0100, you wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Saturday 26 January 2002 20:47, Michael Häckel wrote:
> > If you now start a poll, what people want to see most in KMail, you
> > probably get:
> > 
> > 1. Merge it with KNode, KOrganizer, KArm, KPilot and Kandy and call
> > the result KOutlook.

But come on - there's a difference between reasonable requests (like mine) and \
unreasonable ones (Like "Why doesn't KMail run on Windows?!?!?" Why won't it \
propagate my favorite outlook virus!?!?"  ;-)   )

And perhaps some integration with other KDE components isn't a bad idea, anyway. In \
fact I thought ya'll were indeed working on with Knode, aren't you?

OTH, I thought KDE as a "Desktop Environment" was meant to have all it's components \
"integrated" at the D-E level anyway - it shouldn't have to be entirely up to the \
application to take integration matters into it's own hand, should it (not that I \
have any knowledge of what I'm talking about here ;-) )?

> > 
> > 2. SMTP authentication.
> > 
> > Well, 1. won't happen,
> 
> At least it won't be called KOutlook. But why shouldn't we put some of 
> these programs together in a KOffice like shell? 

Indeed why not. In fact, why not integrate them with KOffice proper - after all, \
Outlook is integrated with MS Office ;-)

> The only thing which 
> we had to do is make a KPart out of KMail. But this wouldn't be such a 
> bad idea. KMail could then still be used either as standalone 
> application or as one of multiple plugins in the Kommunication shell or 
> even as plugin in Konqueror (at least the KMComposer part).

Honestly, isn't there at least some possibility that this could be a good thing? And \
no, I'm not saying that we need to do anything the way MS does it, nor am I saying \
that it won't have any drawbacks, such as security issues, nor am I saying any of it \
would be easy or even possible to do.


> > 2. is finally implemented since some months,
> > but most people didn't realize that yet.
> 
> The reason for this is of course that it's not in a stable version.

Anyway, neither 1 nor 2 had any bearing on small feature requests like my original \
one.



----------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Wilson
System Administrator

Cedar Creek Software     http://www.cedarcreeksoftware.com
Central Texas IT     http://www.centraltexasit.com

_______________________________________________
kmail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail


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