Re: [Evolution-hackers] Moving from the single mbox file format for the local folders

[chen <pchenthill novell com>]

On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 13:56 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 18:07 +0530, chen wrote:
> > I also come across another issue, even if we start using maildir
> format,
> > we cannot assume that multiple applications would access the data
> > especially since local folders belong to evolution and would be used
> > frequently. (see https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=592310 )
> 
> So you intend to go to a proprietary format because it prevents other
> tools from meddling with the internal data while Evolution runs? 
No :) as explained we have been thinking much about using CamelDataCache
which is already in other remote backends.

> Sure,
> that's one way of solving this "problem". But remember, for several of
> your users being able to have one maildir storage shared between apps
> is
> a valuable *feature*.
> 
> To address your performance concerns regarding maildir and rescanning,
> the same can be achieved by declaring that directory
> Evolution-internal
> and not allow users to touch it with other apps - pretty much the
> SKIP_LSUMMARY_CHECK env variable which is already in the code.
> 
Makes sense. I have read through all the mails in this thread. After
hearing all the views it is clear that maildir would be the best way to
go, especially because it is popular and used my many other clients. The
reason for choosing mbox long back too. Also comparing the added
advantage by going with CamelDataCache is less.

So I think we can conclude the way to go as maildir. We will also have a
preference option for sharing, which will be disabled by default for the
local folders in evolution.

I will start with the issues which Milan had summarized and migrate the
local folders to maildir.

- Chenthill.
> > > > I definitely won't switch away from maildir as my format of
> choice
> > > > because it integrates nicely with offlineimap.
> > > 
> > > Sure, I think users should have that freedom. Camel's local folder
> > > implementation has that built in. This new approach should be the
> > > default for new users, and as option for users to migrate to it
> for
> > > existing users. If users willingly stay with maildir or
> > > 1mbox-per-folder that should also be there.
> > Looking at the information gathered, am favoring Approach #2 -
> > mboxfile-per-mail. I would be starting the work this week if I don't
> see
> > any reasons to change the approach. Just want to put in the best
> > possible solution :)
> 
> I still don't see the advantage and fear that Evolution will degrade
> further because effort are directed towards writing new code instead
> of
> fixing the known problems in the existing code base.