Lex Spoon wrote:

 >>It seems to me (maybe incorrectly) that Celeste would need to do
 >>similarly to other clients in that the mail file needs to be broken up
 >>into multiple files, generally according to the mailbox scheme set up 
 >>by the user.
 >>
 >
 > It might turn out this way, but I'm hoping that you don't have to.
 >
 > If you do have to split the database, then I prefer the way that John
 > Maloney has suggested: divide by time.  Have a 1999 database, a 2000
 > database, etc.  I know that personally, I rarely retrieve mesages
 > older than a few months back, but it's not so infrequent that I'll
 > want to retrieve a message when I've forgotten what category it was
 > in.


I don't know if it will be a requirement or not. After all there are 
many databases much larger than my 600mb in mail. I have a tendency not 
to delete mail I might want to search on for information. I am on many 
mailing lists that I do not actively read because of time, but I like 
the content and want it available for future usage. Because of this my 
mail storage volume will only increase.

Time is an interesting but a much more arbitrary means of dividing mail. 
It seperates like content and threads of discussion across all mailing 
lists and discussions in the maildb. This would not be a relevant point 
if the backen/UI provided a seemless view of the mail.


 > Incidentally, the UI isn't very helpful if you have multiple
 > databases. You can do "Celeste openOn: 'mail2000'", but then each
 > Celeste window will be independent.

I disagree. The UI is where the vagaries of how the mail is stored 
should become a non-issue for the user.

In Eudora and Communicator, all of the mail is in separate files 
according to the mailbox division of the user. The UI provides for a 
consistent view of the mail to the user regardless of storage.

Because I manage personal mail on two computers, I have at times put on 
floppy or emailed myself one of the mailboxes I had on the other 
computer so that I would have a consistent system. Before I built my PC 
(Debian Sid) I shared the Mac my wife uses with her. I was cleaning out 
Eudora of my mail on that Mac the other day and simply mailed myself the 
mailboxes I did not have. Very useful.

Okay, back to the point. :)
In Eudora or Communicator the user doesn't know that mail is broken up 
into several files. The UI makes know requirements of such upon the user.

However, the maildb issue is resolved doesn't make me a large amount of 
difference as long as:

Performance is as good as it gets
  ie: If performance with a single file is as good as with multiple 
files, then okay. :)

The view to the user is not affected.

It doesn't limit capabilities to "fileout" various portions like a mailbox.

Istead of "Celeste openOn: 'mail2000'" how about
    "Celeste openOn: 'jhouchin at texoma.net'"
or  "Celeste openUserMail: 'jhouchin at texoma.net'"

This would allow for the future provision of multiple email accounts. 
This would also provide an opportunity to abstract the interface from 
the backend to the UI so that the interface is not file based. The 
backend handles mail storage management. The UI's only issue is the 
backend's API.


 >>I asked my wife the other day what it would take to get her away from
 >>Eudora. She's open to such a move but it would have to be reasonably
 >>feature equivalent and user friendly. She and my children are 
 >>currently on Macs.
 >
 > We definitely need more hacker types to play with it before Jo Blows
 > are set loose on it--email is one of the last things on a computer
 > that you want to be difficult!  In particular, it would be great to
 > have suggestions on just what non-techies would like to see.

Absolutely. This why I look forward to when I can move my mail to 
Celeste. Then as a daily user of Celeste I can contribute to it's 
development. I will be available to fix bugs and scratch itches.

The more Squeak developers who can use Celeste the more this will be the 
case. Even if their time is limited. They hit a bug or have an itch, 
drop behind the scenes write a little code and scratch or squash. Voila 
Celeste incrementally becomes "the email client" of choice. :)

 > Alan's suggestion of a side-by-side comparison with Eudora sounds
 > like it would be enlightening.

That would be easy to arrange.

 >>Being able to import or use standard mbox format mailboxes would be
 >>great. I frequently join mailing lists which have either downloadable
 >>archives or archives available from the mail server. It would be nice
 >>for Celeste to handle that.
 >>
 >
 > Celeste can read and append to Unix-format mailboxes, which Eudora
 > also uses (or at least used to use).  More formats would certainly be 
 > nice, though.
 >
 > -Lex


Enjoying the discussion. Hope it proves fruitful. :)

Jimmie Houchin