Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
Am 01.07.2012 18:31, schrieb Peter Lewis: > I have been watching this discussion and most interesting it is. > > When kmail started playing up for me, I am on 4.7.2 OpenSuse package, I took > the opportunity to set up my own imap server, cyrus, and to use sieve to > filter my mail into folders on the server. > This has worked for me and kmail has a good sieve editor. For those filter > actions and my multiple identities I still use kmail but the removal of the > rather large array of filters has allowed kmail to run well enough. > > Anyone else tried this setup? Yes, I use the same setup since about 10 years. Cyrus imap server and postfix for mail dispatch. My postfix handles spam/virus checking as well. My complete Filtering is done by sieve on the server. As I use different clients there is no way around server base filtering. Kmail has a very good sieve editor but sadly the kerberos authentication is broken in recent kmail2 versions. Martin > > All the best, > Peter Lewis ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/07/12 17:31, Peter Lewis wrote: > I have been watching this discussion and most interesting it is. > > When kmail started playing up for me, I am on 4.7.2 OpenSuse > package, I took the opportunity to set up my own imap server, > cyrus, and to use sieve to filter my mail into folders on the > server. This has worked for me and kmail has a good sieve editor. > For those filter actions and my multiple identities I still use > kmail but the removal of the rather large array of filters has > allowed kmail to run well enough. > > Anyone else tried this setup? I have a dovecot IMAP server, and procmail does my filtering, with bogofilter being part of the filtering process. The great advantage of having your own server (possible even if you only have one box) is that when KMail gives problems the mail itself is unaffected so you can simply try a different client. I dip in to KMail from time to time - and there are a few things that it still does better than any other client - but mostly read in Thunderbird - and it really doesn't matter. I could read in a different client every time, and nothing is affected. FWIW, I use a handful of identities, and somewhere approaching 100 folders (I gave up counting in the 70s and there were a lot left). Anne -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk/wgKUACgkQj93fyh4cnBdlRwCfatgYxT7RRIIQ6yTqQJ/85WQ/ cvEAn2qam6517z7KM7r5xmtQe4bZryH4 =Is5e -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
On 01/07/12 15:02, J wrote: > One Kmail problem that I haven't seen mentioned on here is probably only of > interest to very high volume email users and that' s speed. It seems it's much > slower than it used to be and that drove this particular user away. This > cropped > up on a local linux mailing list that I use from time to time. If I'm away > for a > week I sometimes get 100 plus emails in one download. I would say that takes > around 2 sec to pass through up to 10 filters. Seems fine to me but many will > only pass through a couple of filters. Sometimes you can speed things up by changing the order of filters, so that frequent triggers occur earlier in the sorting mechanism. As an example, spam/virus filters don't generally need to run on mailing lists, so your filters could be ordered: mailing lists, spam/virus filters, the rest. -- Bob Williams System: Linux 3.1.10-1.13-desktop Distro: openSUSE 12.1 (x86_64) with KDE Development Platform: 4.8.4 (4.8.4) "release 511" Uptime: 06:00am up 5 days 20:54, 4 users, load average: 2.00, 1.79, 1.63 ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
On Sunday 01 Jul 2012 04:16:00 John Woodhouse wrote: > > From: Anne Wilson > > To: kde@mail.kde.org > > Cc: > > Sent: Saturday, 30 June 2012, 14:58 > > Subject: Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail > > > > On 30/06/12 09:14, Martin (KDE) wrote: > >> Na, thunderbird is more than a toy. The basic functions in TBird > >> are limited, but that's what add-ons are for. These automatic > >> filter stuff on folders (not as great as kmails) is hidden in an > >> additional add-on called "Folder Account". > > > > This also allows folders to be associated with identities, as well as > > a few other folder-specific tweaks. Very useful. > > > > Anne > > Out of interest I am not a trivial email user. I run 8 additional folders > and a number of filters plus archive folders and 6 identities. I've already > mentioned which kmail I use. From these posts it looks like I will have to > tread carefully when I upgrade which will probably be around next Xmas. > Maybe sooner. Much depend on what comments I find on the web. Bug reporting > "stable" releases is a useful thing to do. It sometimes even produces > results and I do my best in that respect. I'm toying with the idea of > attacking samba.org. :-) Must stick to the topic. > -- I have been watching this discussion and most interesting it is. When kmail started playing up for me, I am on 4.7.2 OpenSuse package, I took the opportunity to set up my own imap server, cyrus, and to use sieve to filter my mail into folders on the server. This has worked for me and kmail has a good sieve editor. For those filter actions and my multiple identities I still use kmail but the removal of the rather large array of filters has allowed kmail to run well enough. Anyone else tried this setup? All the best, Peter Lewis ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
-Original Message- From: kde-boun...@mail.kde.org [mailto:kde-boun...@mail.kde.org] On Behalf Of John Woodhouse Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 7:16 AM To: kde@mail.kde.org Subject: Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail Out of interest I am not a trivial email user. I run 8 additional folders and a number of filters plus archive folders and 6 identities. I've already mentioned which kmail I use. From these posts it looks like I will have to tread carefully when I upgrade which will probably be around next Xmas. Maybe sooner. Much depend on what comments I find on the web. Bug reporting "stable" releases is a useful thing to do. It sometimes even produces results and I do my best in that respect. I'm toying with the idea of attacking samba.org. :-) Must stick to the topic. I did have problems importing my early email and address book but it turned out to be me. The only serious problem is the anomaly between filter email address checking and address book checking. I did mention that back in 3 and was told filters aren't meant to be used like that. Clearly anyone who thinks that doesn't communicate with one or two people that I do and also doesn't realise how useful name tag changes can be. As a for instance they can be used to expand the usability of a single email address where the package allows that. One Kmail problem that I haven't seen mentioned on here is probably only of interest to very high volume email users and that' s speed. It seems it's much slower than it used to be and that drove this particular user away. This cropped up on a local linux mailing list that I use from time to time. If I'm away for a week I sometimes get 100 plus emails in one download. I would say that takes around 2 sec to pass through up to 10 filters. Seems fine to me but many will only pass through a couple of filters. John ___ Greetings, I average over 5000 Email PER DAY (including spam) to my roll accounts (postmaster@, abuse@, webmaster@ 100's of domains) that require me to not use the automatic spam-filters provided by the ISP I work for. I use claws-mail and reverse-filter. I also have 10+ years of email archives. What I do is I filter the GOOD email into folder and leave the junk in the inbox to be scanned by hand after the good email has been properly dealt with. This same system use 4 separate IMAP-based email accounts to bring in this supertanker of email dumps. Claws mail works well for this, with one exception. The IMAP I/O is slow when deleting/moving or otherwise updating the server email folders. After doing a little debugging it stems from claws-mail insistence on re-reading the mail folder after each step, (ie set flags, read mailbox; purge mailbox, read mailbox; update headers, read mailbox; etc). It adds about 2-3 seconds after each action. My solution is to do things in bulk whenever possible. I don't filter on the address book itself, as I keep my main address book in my head and not on the computer. I don't know if claws-mail can or can't do this and for me it doesn't matter. J ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
> From: Anne Wilson > To: kde@mail.kde.org > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, 30 June 2012, 14:58 > Subject: Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 30/06/12 09:14, Martin (KDE) wrote: >> Na, thunderbird is more than a toy. The basic functions in TBird >> are limited, but that's what add-ons are for. These automatic >> filter stuff on folders (not as great as kmails) is hidden in an >> additional add-on called "Folder Account". > > This also allows folders to be associated with identities, as well as > a few other folder-specific tweaks. Very useful. > > Anne > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAk/vBh0ACgkQj93fyh4cnBdCVgCghXinTvypGHoyGqc9+JRWKyYs > bykAmwTFriMda91eF+O6s2pGUhtes5fG > =G3ii > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > This message is from the kde mailing list. > Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. > Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. > More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html. > Out of interest I am not a trivial email user. I run 8 additional folders and a number of filters plus archive folders and 6 identities. I've already mentioned which kmail I use. From these posts it looks like I will have to tread carefully when I upgrade which will probably be around next Xmas. Maybe sooner. Much depend on what comments I find on the web. Bug reporting "stable" releases is a useful thing to do. It sometimes even produces results and I do my best in that respect. I'm toying with the idea of attacking samba.org. :-) Must stick to the topic. I did have problems importing my early email and address book but it turned out to be me. The only serious problem is the anomaly between filter email address checking and address book checking. I did mention that back in 3 and was told filters aren't meant to be used like that. Clearly anyone who thinks that doesn't communicate with one or two people that I do and also doesn't realise how useful name tag changes can be. As a for instance they can be used to expand the usability of a single email address where the package allows that. One Kmail problem that I haven't seen mentioned on here is probably only of interest to very high volume email users and that' s speed. It seems it's much slower than it used to be and that drove this particular user away. This cropped up on a local linux mailing list that I use from time to time. If I'm away for a week I sometimes get 100 plus emails in one download. I would say that takes around 2 sec to pass through up to 10 filters. Seems fine to me but many will only pass through a couple of filters. John ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
Jörg Stadermann posted on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 09:43:35 +0200 as excerpted: > At this point desperation set in. It seemed , there wasn't a feasible > replacement for kmail, which would suit my needs. > > Enter claws-mails: It's not pretty, some of it's configuration seems a > bit odd, PIM is limited to a vCalendar-plugin, but it's doing the job. > There's nothing I did in kmail I can't do in claws-mail and I guess > there are a lot of things it can do that kmail doesn't. And yes, you can > use vim as editor ;-) > So if you're looking for a kmail replacement, have a look at claws-mail. > For me it seems to be the best option for kmail power users. As regulars already know, I've been recommending claws-mail for anyone having problems with kmail, as well. I'm a very happy user! =:^) There /is/ however at least one thing that I did in kmail, that I couldn't find a built-in or existing helper-script replacement for, for claws. Mostly as a debugging aid, back on kmail, I had all my filters set to insert a custom header, X-kmail-filter: labeled with the name of the filter, so I could see which of my many anti-spam filters, for instance, sent something to the trash folder, if I decided I wanted to save such messages. As I said, I couldn't figure out how to do that on claws, either built-in or with the existing helper-scripts (tools section on the website). But being reasonably proficient with bash, I quickly found a script on the website that did something similar (I think it added a timestamp header), and modified it to add the header fed to it as a commandline parameter, to the message file also fed to it as a commandline parameter. So the other day, after someone else migrating from kmail reminded me about it, I sent that script in to the claws-mail folks, and got a reply saying it should be added shortly (tho I don't see it yet). claws-addheader is its name, when it's added, or if you're interested before it's added to the site, ask and I can mail it to you. Meanwhile, it's worth noting that there's another qt4-based mail client available, "trojita", but it ONLY does IMAP, not POP3 (which all my providers use, so I couldn't run it here unless I setup my own IMAP server), and is reasonably new and thus likely a bit immature as yet. But if you're on IMAP so /can/ use it, it might be worth checking out at least. http://trojita.flaska.net/ (For gentooers, it's in-tree as mail-client/trojita.) If claws-mail hadn't worked for me for some reason, I was thinking about setting up an IMAP server (perhaps dovecot), and trying trojita. But I decided to try claws-mail first, and it was just about the perfect match for me, so I never did do the IMAP thing and thus didn't get to try trojita. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
Martin (KDE) posted on Sat, 30 Jun 2012 10:14:18 +0200 as excerpted: > Mutt is nice if you have a command line only. But not a mail client you > can give an inexperienced user. I've never used mutt personally, but while I'm reasonably comfortable with the command-line and would likely adapt reasonably quickly to the command-line for mail if I needed to (FWIW, kmail orphaned by akonadi now on claws-mail myself, as regulars know given how happy I've been with it and thus my recommendation of it), mutt is said to have one VERY MAJOR FLAW for my usage: Mutt depends on the still POSIX standard but inefficient and now considered legacy on Linux filesystem atime timestamps to track read-mail. Updating the atime anytime a file is accessed can be quite expensive indeed in terms of filesystem i/o, thus the modern kernel default of "relatime", updating it only the first time it's accessed in a day. But btrfs' copy-on-write (COW) semantics, coupled with its COW-based snapshots, are set to make the problem MUCH WORSE. Normally, COW-based snapshots are quite space-efficient, only taking up additional space where the data has changed between snapshots or between a snapshot and current. But atime updates throw a wrench in things, because that means every time a file is accessed, its metadata has changed. Now, consider what happens if you do a filesystem-wide grep, accessing all files in the process -- that's right, with traditional atime updates on access, 100% of the filesystem's metadata just got COWed! Now consider the effect even with relatime (once-per-day atime updates) if that filesystem has a snapshotting script taking daily snapshots. *NOW* consider the effect if for instance KDE's semantic-desktop is on, scanning everything daily or so to maintain its semantic-indexes! That's right, the effect ends up being 100% metadata duplication with each daily snapshot! Talk about a way to use up those multi-terabyte disks! So there's some discussion of for instance setting noatime by default for btrfs. That's going to break mutt, and a few other long outdated apps still relying on atime. Another alternative would be recording atime separate from the rest of the metadata, so only the atimes will be updated, not 100% of the metadata, and this is very possibly what they'll do. However, it's becoming increasingly apparent that atime simply doesn't fit in the modern filesystem setup, killing efficiency and reducing robustness especially for otherwise read-only task-sets. And as I said, mutt is infamous among filesystem devs (and the distro folks that decide default mount-options for the distro as well) as one of the few apps that still depends on atime. For quite some years now, I've run my systems with the noatime option for on-disk filesystems (I don't bother with virtual/memory-based filesystems like sysfs, tmpfs, devtmpfs, etc, so they stay at the kernel default relatime). Thus, mutt would be broken on my system. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 30/06/12 09:14, Martin (KDE) wrote: > Na, thunderbird is more than a toy. The basic functions in TBird > are limited, but that's what add-ons are for. These automatic > filter stuff on folders (not as great as kmails) is hidden in an > additional add-on called "Folder Account". This also allows folders to be associated with identities, as well as a few other folder-specific tweaks. Very useful. Anne -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk/vBh0ACgkQj93fyh4cnBdCVgCghXinTvypGHoyGqc9+JRWKyYs bykAmwTFriMda91eF+O6s2pGUhtes5fG =G3ii -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
Am 30.06.2012 10:43, schrieb Jörg Stadermann: > Am Sat, 30 Jun 2012 10:14:18 +0200 > schrieb "Martin (KDE)" : > >>> At that point, I decided >>> Thunderbird is not for me. Why is this thing so popular, even in >>> business environments? It's a toy, not more. >> >> Na, thunderbird is more than a toy. The basic functions in TBird are >> limited, but that's what add-ons are for. These automatic filter stuff >> on folders (not as great as kmails) is hidden in an additional add-on >> called "Folder Account". > > And that's the problem: IMO automatic filtering is vital for a > decent email-client. What, if the add-on is not maintained anymore, or > the update to a newer version of TB takes too long? Agreed, > add-ons are for expanding functionality, but vital functions > shouldn't be delegated to community-maintained add-ons. I second that. But mileage may vary. There are many people out there who do not even know what automatic filtering is (they don't even use folders besides the default one). Another example: I use different identities with different language settings (this on is English others are German), but thunderbird is not able to handle different languages for different identities. Obviously this function is not used that much (I don't even know a add-on for this). Martin > > Just my 2 cents. > > Joerg > ___ > This message is from the kde mailing list. > Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. > Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. > More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html. ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
Am Sat, 30 Jun 2012 10:14:18 +0200 schrieb "Martin (KDE)" : > > At that point, I decided > > Thunderbird is not for me. Why is this thing so popular, even in > > business environments? It's a toy, not more. > > Na, thunderbird is more than a toy. The basic functions in TBird are > limited, but that's what add-ons are for. These automatic filter stuff > on folders (not as great as kmails) is hidden in an additional add-on > called "Folder Account". And that's the problem: IMO automatic filtering is vital for a decent email-client. What, if the add-on is not maintained anymore, or the update to a newer version of TB takes too long? Agreed, add-ons are for expanding functionality, but vital functions shouldn't be delegated to community-maintained add-ons. Just my 2 cents. Joerg ___ This message is from the kde mailing list. Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde. Archives: http://lists.kde.org/. More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
Re: [kde] Why I (almost) stayed with KMail
Am 30.06.2012 09:43, schrieb Jörg Stadermann: > Here's how I migrated away from kmail and why I almost failed: > > Man, what a sorry state today's email clients are in. How long is > email around, 30 years? It seems, most modern clients still assume that > you receive about 10 mail per day and that your folder structure > is as complex as inbox and one or two additional folders. I guess > that's because that what used to be email conversation has shifted more > and more to facebook, twitter and the like. But let's start from the > beginning: My distro (Slackware) stayed with kde 4.4 quite long, > except some minor annoyances Kdepim did a good job for me and > since I'm a long time kde user I saw no real reason to use > something else. Recently .Slackware (in current) switched to 4.8 > and I faithfully upgraded, since I never had major problems with > kde. Now akonadi managed my mail and suddenly I could understand > all the moaning in forums and lists. Mind you, the conversion > went smooth and I still think that akonadi is not such a bad idea > as long as we're talking about unifying resources, but the whole kmal2 > experience became rather unpleasant. And that I was forced to use > kwallet is a no-go. After I had my share of "akonadi_resource_bla > is offline" and "Please wait, searching folder content" I > decided, it was time to leave. So long and thank you for the fish. > > The first step was to move my mail. Since I wanted to check > several mail clients, the natural choice was IMAP. Surprisingly > enough, kmail did a good job moving my 10,000+ mails to my > provider's server. I have 5GB mail space, so no sweat. Filtering > incoming mails to folders is done on the server, but I need some > post-processing, like folder-dependent handling of mails, based > on age or sender, a job kmail did quite well. > > Next step was collecting a list of potential replacements for > kmail, preferably with PIM features, but that was not mandatory. > So I came up with Thunderbird (the obvious candidate), Mutt, > Zimbra (just to check) and claws-mail. Evolution is not an > option, because Slackware does not include Gnome. The first I checked > was Thunderbird 13.01. Wow, that was funny: I use Thunderbird quite > often as a quick and dirty way to check my emails from MS computers, > because it's easy to setup and easy to remove after use, but that > was completely different now, first it's rather slow with IMAP, > second it's ugly and third it's mail management is really > limited. I.e. to convince Thunderbird to check all folders for new > mail, I had to tweak about:config. I guess thers's probably an > option in the config dialogs, but I couldn't find it. But the > real show stopper was the folder management. There are options > for encoding and syncing and quotas, but processing mails by > status is limited to age and actions are limited to delete or not > delete. Something like in kmail, "Move messages older than 30 > days to archive" is simply not possible. Use filters, I hear you > say. Yeah, good idea, but here's the catch: Thunderbird can do > automatic filtering only on incoming mails! Filters on mails in > folders have to be applied manually. At that point, I decided > Thunderbird is not for me. Why is this thing so popular, even in > business environments? It's a toy, not more. Na, thunderbird is more than a toy. The basic functions in TBird are limited, but that's what add-ons are for. These automatic filter stuff on folders (not as great as kmails) is hidden in an additional add-on called "Folder Account". I had the same problem like many others. Additionally I have to support windows users and I have a central PIM server (SOGo btw.). There are not that much mail clients out there supporting all this. Currently I use Thunderbird for this but I test kmail every now and then. After having many problems with the first official release (minor problems as timeouts, but major as several mail losses as well) the recent kmail2 is quite OK. I think the kmail2 in 4.9 Release will be as good as the old kmail1 was/is. > > Next try, Mutt: I always liked Mutt, probably because of the > challenge, but it became apparent very quickly, that it would > need a lot of effort, getting Mutt fit for today's email > requirements. Not the processing but the displaying of messages is > the problem. Nowadays people tend to sent emails in all kind of > formats with all kind of attached media and you want to see that > stuff right away. I'm sure Mutt can do this, but currently the effort is > too big for me. Mutt is nice if you have a command line only. But not a mail client you can give an inexperienced user. > > Zimbra: Next one. No, seriously, what's that supposed to be. I > guess there's some vision behind, but I don't get it. > > At this point desperation set in. It seemed , there wasn't a > feasible replacement for kmail, which would suit my needs. > > Enter claws-mails: It's not pretty, some of it's configurat
