Dave P writes: <> > The main area is the actual storage method for emails. Would people prefer > a single file holding all emails, individual files for each email, which > would be indexed on startup, or individual files plus a maintained index? > > Each has plusses and minuses. Discuss.
Imho, the simplest solution would be your last option. However, due to the limitations of the Qdos/SMSQ FS there is a limit on the number of files that can usefully be stored in a directory without slowing down the whole system. (The actual physical limit is 32k files per directory, I believe). With the current name length limit youd probably be better off with sub-directory and filenames reduced to same-length consecutive numbers, with the real names held in an index, or indexes. You might be able to work with zip though, using its directory, name, compression and encryption facilities? (However, file integrity would be difficult to maintain - eg a powercut during file operations could be catastrophic.) Doing it all in one big file would more or less involve writing your own file system! (Could be fun). > Second, multiple mail boxes. Is the ability to send/receive from multiple > mailboxes useful or not? What about "profiles" where one profile is > accessed at a time, or is the ability to access multiple mailboxes > simultaneously 'very important' to you? I dont use such features at present, but it might prove useful. Why not wait until V2.00? > Finally, how important would it be to use a pointer environment, or would > you be happy to use industry standard CTRL-key combinations? PE is a must for the likes of me. But that would lock some other people out, of course. Perhaps youd have to do two versions ;) Per
