[please don't cc me the messages sent to the list, thanks] On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:20:55 +0200 Stefano Salvi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SS> The solution is simple: SS> Configure include files!!! It's a possibility but this doesn't solve the problem. In fact, it's not sufficiently flexible neither: what I have already started to implement is a more powerful scheme in which you can have any number of "config sources", be they files (so this supersedes your proposal), registry or config stored on remote IMAP folders. But the real problem is... SS> Whith this schema there is no problem in reading configuration: the files SS> are simply merged. The problem arises when you want to update it, ... this. SS> as M must keep track of hte location of each directive, updating it in SS> the original file. This is not that bad neither but consider that we start from scratch, i.e. have just installed M under, say, Windows. After using it for some time how can we separae the settings in Windows-specific ones and not? SS> When you add a filter M will write in the common include file, SS> where it found the original filter list. This way the user can choose what SS> configuration items keep common and which to keep independent. The problem is how to implement this choice at UI level. The options dialog is already quite horrible, we can't add yet another level of complexity to it... Or maybe we can because I really don't see any other way to do it. Right now I think to add a combobox on top of it to choose the "config source" being edited. It will be quite awkward to use but I just don't see anything else. Regards, VZ ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Mahogany-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mahogany-users
