[Kde-pim] Re: close the Bug 77862: kio_imap processes

[Guy Maurel]

Hello Ingo!

On Sunday 07 November 2010 23:23:21 Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> On Sunday 07 November 2010, Guy Maurel wrote:
> > Hello Carsten!
> > 
> > On Friday 05 November 2010 11:09:29 Carsten Burghardt wrote:
> > > Hi Guy,
> > > 
> > > > Let me now ask a provocative question?
> > > > What is the really necessary, **not to close** the connection
> > > > after the transfer is done?
> > > > Why does kmail send a imap-NOOP each minute, even if the
> > > > "check-interval" is set to zero?
> > > 
> > > Because otherwise you would have to login again to the server for
> > > whatever action you want to initiate with the server. That is not
> > > only new-mail checks but everything IMAP related.
> > 
> > Right!
> > But with the actual version of kmail2, the user must use the KWallet,
> > where the passwort is stored. It will does the work for me.
> > So for me, it is not enough to get the connection open all the time.
> > I think, we need a stronger reason. If not, we could close the
> > connection, open a new one only at the time a new action is coming,
> > and escape the problem with the IP-Change.
> 
> Re-opening the connection each time I want to read the next message is
> completely insane. In particular, with an encrypted connection this will
"insane" isn't the right adjectiv for this!
My proposal is to close the connection after a "amount of time", maybe after a 
time of inactivity...

> require several round trips. IMNSHO, it's insane to optimize for a
NO, it isn't insane to try to make kmail better!
We have to find a solution for as many situations as possible...
As the processors are getting quicker, as the bandwidths are getting larger,
we need to have informations about the time kmail requires for "several round 
trips" and examinate if it is realy "too long" to wait for.
It was correct to deal such a way as the users have only a 54K-modem. Now, we 
have to re-examine the situation before taking a decision. 

> potential problem with a changing IP address, a problem that I will
> never have at work or at home. 
Right! YOU don't have this problem, I also not!
The user who has written (some years ago) the bug, has found the problem  and 
we have to work on it. We have to find some proper workaround(s).

> How do other protocols, e.g. FTP, cope
> with this? I cannot believe that kio_ftp closes and re-opens the
"believe"  isn't the right word to speak about a bug.
We know or we don't know about the other protocols.

I propose to examine some other mail-front-end and compare.
It might be usefull to re-examine our position.
Do we know where are the people who made this part of kmail?
Do we know about the strategy they found (at that time) for the best?
Could it be necessary today to modify this old strategy a little bit?

best regards
-- 
guy
_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/