On Jul 13, 2006, at 3:19 PM, Andi Vajda wrote:
>
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Sheila Mooney wrote:
>
>> 1) The technical pros/cons/issues for all of these
alternatives so
>> then we can circle back and evaluate these from a
workflow
>> perspective.
>> 2) What are some other options we could consider
that we may not
>> have thought of.
>
> Until Chandler's UI can implement a proper mail
client, the next
> best solution is to use Chandler as a data hub for
email and let
> another - existing - mail client handle the mail UI.
This is what
> Travis is currently working on. It is a huge step
forward for me to
> actually start using Chandler since I can then continue
using pine
> for email but this time as an IMAP client against
Chandler-the-IMAP-
> server.
I have to agree with Andi. Since we're targeting people who
would be
considered "power users" it's safe to assume
that they require
features in their email clients that we aren't ready to
deliver in
the beta timeframe.
I'm in the same boat as Andi in this being my number one
barrier to
adoption of Chandler.
>
> Andi..
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation
"chandler-dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chan
dler-dev
_______________________________________________
scooby-dev mailing list
scooby-dev lists.osafoundation.org
http://lists.osafoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman
/listinfo/scooby-dev
|