On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, ZN wrote:
> For a file organisation, I would vote for inbox = directory, email = file.
This is precisely what i have decided to do, based on the mixed feedback.
I'm currently working on how much to put in the index - quite a lot,
because it'll save a lot of time.
121102001:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:00000000
The bitfield will actually be an integer, but I expressed it in this
example as bits:
0 Received (1=sent with this client 0=sent with any other client)
1 Read
2 Reply sent
3 Forwarded
4 - reserved
5 - reserved
6 Archived
7 Deleted
A copy of this status will be stored in the header too, so if ever the
index does not match the available emails (power failure?) the index can
be reconstructed.
> The user could then have an option to periodically physically delete all
> files marked as deleted. Also, the number of files should be kept to a sane
> number, once this is reached, the user could be prompted to compress older
I plan that deleted files will be moved to a deleted folder on exit.
Deleted folder will expire emails after 7 days (configurable).
I will need rationality checks on the system clock, of course, and will
include a timed daemon so if you wish, it can automatically set your
system clock to the correct time.
> Finally: a small 'I told you so' for the people who keep saying the file
> system is just fine and that 36 characters are enough. Funny how this can
> turn out to be a limitation even for a 'simple' application, isn't it? I
> TOLD YOU SO!
I would like to see a more linux-like filesystem, and I'm talking about
look and feel, not how it's implemented. Access restrictions, groups, etc
:o)
Now I have bought a copy of SMSQ I feel entitled :o)~
Dave
