Mikhail Ramendik wrote:
Sri Gupta wrote:
| Perhaps even Ilja won't have any regrets if he can dump the current
| codebase. However, his input, and Aaron's as well, is critical in
| such a decision. And I also don't want to alienate the current
| userbase.
Please don't! Some of us are using dbmail in production deployment..
I use it too. And don't plan on abandoning the clients who pay me to provide email services for their students
and employees. Typically many small mailboxes. That's where dbmail is quite good atm.
If you're going to do a rewrite, beware the second systems effect..
Had to look that one up :)
It's also probably why we wont go with twisted. It's a huge bloat. Great stuff, no doubt, but a major
framework is probably not what we need to bring dbmail ahead. For me, dbmail is about storage of email first
and last. I'm not smart enough to conceive and implement the ultimate mailstorage engine. But I can work on
providing current functionality in software modules aimed at extension and customization. And export-tool for
dumping a dbmail-database (or selected subset thereof) would for instance be a nice warming up excersize in
accessing the current storage layout.
#> dbmail-export --user=somefool --folder="/" --recursive
--outdir="/home/somefool/Mail/"
#> dbmail-export --user=somefool --folder="#Users/otheruser/readonly-folder" \
--outfile="/home/somefool/Users/otheruser/readonly-folder"
something along those lines.
After that, replacing dbmail-smtp, dbmail-util and dbmail-user with python-based rewrites could lead to a nice
set of base-classes to tackle the more complex task of replacing the daemons should we choose to do so (or
find someone crazy enough). However, eliminating the code required by the stand-alone tools will have the
added benefit of a good spring cleaning in the source tree.
Lofty goals are fantastic, but if they take forever to implement,
people will jump ship. A rewrite is an acceptable idea if it is
feasible in terms of development time and either provides a CLEAR
upgrade path from the existing software, or is backwards compatible.
Let's not take the path of 'enlightenment' then, heh. Full backward
compatibility where possible, small steps.
--
________________________________________________________________
Paul Stevens mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NET FACILITIES GROUP PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl
