[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kmail-devel
Subject: Re: [Kde-pim] Re: ClientInterface (was Re: Fwd: [PATCH] kernel / UI
From: Don Sanders <sanders () kde ! org>
Date: 2003-07-21 2:38:02
[Download RAW message or body]
On Saturday 19 July 2003 17:53, Martin Konold wrote:
> Am Freitag, 18. Juli 2003 10:44 schrieb Marc Mutz:
>
> Hi,
>
> > the advocates of
> > this proprietory IMAP replacement just try to fix the symptoms.
>
> I think that this is the strongest argument against this c/s idea!
> if you want to seperate the storage from the GUI use IMAP but dont
> invent another protocol!
>
> If you want different clients to concurrently access the mail
> storage use IMAP.....
The problem with this suggestion is that even for IMAP KMail needs a
local representation of what's on the server. eg. dimap uses a
maildir representation.
We want to allow multiple clients to access this local representation.
Thus we have a case of multiple processes (one for each client)
accessing a shared resource (the local representation) and hence we
need a mechanism to manage access to that resource.
I know of two approaches to solve this problem, the first is to use a
single server process to manage access. The second is to make every
client a server and create a peer-peer network.
The proponents of the serverless model don't seem to fully understand
the complexities of managing shared access to a resource. I covered
some of those overlooked complexities in my latest mail to Marc.
> IMHO the current proposal is completeley overengineered and
> reinventing the wheel.
It's the simplest solution I know of and in my opinion the only
feasible solution presented thus far.
Don.
_______________________________________________
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]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic