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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Rewrite KMail? (was Re: Rework of the mail composer)
From:       Jason Stephenson <panda () mis ! net>
Date:       2001-01-06 20:17:55
[Download RAW message or body]

On Saturday 06 January 2001 13:28, Don Sanders wrote:
> I think the basic KMail architecture is ok. In fact the architecture is not
> unque to KMail but is pretty standard, and I've seen similar things
> elsewhere eg the Java mail handling API.

If you're talking about interface and basic code layout, I don't have many 
problems with the current KMail code. I think handling of messages and 
folders could be tidied up a bit.

I only suggested a rewrite because we could take advantage of the opportunity 
to tidy up the design, make it more modular, and make more use of DCOP and 
KParts.

With a reuseable module framework in place, it makes almost no sense to have 
any monolithic applications. You just have one app that loads various parts 
depending on what the user wants to do at that time. You don't need separate 
applications for word processing, email, web surfing, it can all be there in 
one place and you just load the appropriate code at the appropriate time. So, 
in essence, all you have is a single, window/module manager.

>
> Well maybe the handling of message parts could be improved but I don't want
> to get involved in a lengthy discussion about that.
_______________________________________________
Kmail Developers mailing list
Kmail@master.kde.org
http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail

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