Re: Unidentified subject! (Two Balsas crash)

[David Pickens <dpickens iaesthetic com>]

On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Jules Bean wrote:

> Well, this is certainly the wrong forum for the discussion, so I'll pipe
> down in a minute,
> 
> But basically, because that's not the unix philosophy.  Imagine if it
> asked you every time you ran two terminals, or to shells.
> 
> I quite often run two mail-readers (text-based ones) so I can read
> different folders simultaneously.  Also, if I'm away from my desk I can
> telnet in and start a new session.

I hope you'll take this in the spirit in which it's intended, but we're
not, after all, talking about the latest version of grep. :)  Even
established text mail clients like Pine don't handle multiple instances
particularly well.  From a logistical point of view, I wonder if splitting
balsa into a server/client (libbalsa/libmutt -- balsa) model app. is worth
the effort considering the limited 'gain', especially while evolution is
in development.  Even creating a read-only mode would be pretty
time-consuming, and the version that's operating read-only probably
wouldn't see new mail, or allow the user to compose new messages (as these
would be copied to sentbox, etc.).  

IF what you want is the ability to view two Folders/Mailboxes at the same
time it might be better to add that to balsa at some point.

Of course, I would entirely agree that giving a warning dialog is much
better than simply allowing balsa to crash.  (But, I'm not so sure that
foregrounding the currently running version of balsa is such a bad idea.)

It is a bit awkward either way, though, so I understand your objection.

David