Mon Apr 18 2016 10:30:57 EDTfrom IGnatius T Foobar @ UncensoredWe might just have to build our own minimalist CSS framework if we want to avoid upstream abandonment, but it will have to be done carefully. And sure, we might be having this conversation again someday, but if it's 15-20 years from now then I don't mind :)
That is why I keep talking about this amazium thing ( http://amazium.co.uk source: https://github.com/OwlyStuff/Amazium/tree/v3.6.1 ), it is so minimalist, you can even understand what it does and why it does the things. Maybe we throw in an additional normlize.css ( https://necolas.github.io/normalize.css/ ) in order to get cross browser consistent layout, and that is it.
Hoping to be good for 15-20 years is rather optimistic, but hey, email is around for way longer.
Again I have to finish the database changes to Citadel Server first. We'll get the next major release out with that in place, plus any other bugfixes and whatever, and release it with the latest WebCit in its current form.
I am still contemplating wether it would be somehow possible to fetch the data from the database without the need of webcit specific code. Doing it all in js on the client side is probably way to slow on mobile devices.
But then again, target audience is different from the people that need a webmail interface for their hosted homepage. I guess they already have a server and want easy and fast deployment of MTA and Webinterface. Should we keep starting to attract the docker hipsters?
By the way, I've made a decision to get rid of the decimal points in our version numbers. The next version after Citadel 9.01 will be Citadel 902, followed by 903 and 904 and so on.
Why waste the opportunity to call it CitadelX? Why not call the version with the improvements under the hood and the new webinterface CTDLX and then drop the decimal point and simply start counting upwards? It was once called Citadel U/X, iirc. I liked that.
