>>>>> "RW" == Ronan Waide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RW> On October 28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> Any thoughts? If this isn't appropriate discussion here, let me know.
RW> My stand on this would be no, no, no. Really. No. BBDB works quite
RW> nicely, with vast quantities of entries, using a flat file. The file
RW> is read using native emacsisms (there's some discussion mentioning
RW> this about 9 months or so back on the archives.) and doesn't require
RW> you to have anything else installed. Requiring people to have access
RW> to or use a database so they can have an addressbook is, IMHO, of no
RW> benefit and will only result in less interest in BBDB. Also, BBDB
RW> tends to do most of its work 'in core', writing to the file only when
RW> you explicity save the database. Adding in a database means you have
RW> to call the database any time you want to do anything useful OR you
RW> have to cache everything in the emacs session, at which point any
RW> benefits you might somehow have accrued are rather thoroughly
RW> defeated.
I can only agree, emphatically. Apart from the list of arguments given by
Ronan, adding a data base backend to bbdb would break the first rule of good
design: keep it simple. One would pay the price for the complexity of DB
connectivity for very little gain, if any.
I have a bbdb file with more than 2000 entries and I don't see any slow down
in the use of bbdb (I added the bulk of it in one go -- imported company
phonebook).
Just my 2 cents.
--
----------------------------------------
Ernst J. Taumberger
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mobile: +43 664 230 8465
_______________________________________________
bbdb-info mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/bbdb-info
