[imp] Making large scale changes

[Jon Parise]

On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 08:14:41PM +0000, Nick Loman wrote:

> I have already decided to base this system on IMP -- my question is, how
> can I customise IMP sufficiently whilst allowing others to benefit from
> any extra features I add in? Obviously the answer is "CVS" but presumably
> I would need to have a discussion with the developers as to how the
> features I anticipate adding might fit with the future direction of the
> product and devise a strategy for merging my changes back in?

The preferred answer would be "patches".  If they're good and we think
IMP (overall) would benefit from your code submission, they'll be
committed.
 
> The alternative is just to branch off and do it myself but I would
> consider that a little inpolite on my behalf given that you guys have
> already given so much to the community.

That's always an option, but it's obviously not the optimal one.
 
> As a basic indication of my requirements which may, or may not be covered
> already by the latest development version:
> 
> * complete customisable template

I'd be interested in seeing your implementation of this.

> * folder list on mail list page

We've generally decided against this for performance reasons.

> * interaction with SQL based members directory for searches

Turba does this.

> * linking e-mail attachments to SQL

This sounds like it will be pretty proprietary.

> * more advanced filtering capabilities

I'm sure Max would be interested in what you can contribute here.

> * multiple "extra" mail accounts integrated into single INBOX (is this
> even possible?)

There was talk about using fetchmail to accomplish this.  I wasn't
involved in any of that, though.

> * link to calendars

Kronolith is getting there.

> * recognition of e-mail types and display of particular icon based on
> recognition by e-mail

There's already excellent MIME support in IMP.  Or do you mean
something else?

> * Netscape 3.0+ higher compatibility

Eh?

> * advanced address book capability

Turba, again.

> * more advanced signature support (e.g. multiple signatures)
> * user profiles/accounts

We've been tossing around implementation ideas for both of these for a
while now.  Your thoughts on the issue are welcome.

> There's more but that's a taster for now. IMP developers' thoughts
> appreciated.
 
You might want to subscribe to the development list
(dev@lists.horde.org).  That's where we developers like to hang out
and discuss these kinds of details.

-- 
Jon Parise (jon@csh.rit.edu)  .  Rochester Inst. of Technology
http://www.csh.rit.edu/~jon/  :  Computer Science House Member