The notmuch mail client [LWN.net]

The notmuch mail client

Posted Nov 17, 2009 18:12 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
In reply to: The notmuch mail client by rfunk
Parent article: The notmuch mail client

Yes, but when I put lots of effort into making custom rules and sorting
stuff then that does not get translated to any other client.

If I want to make, say, a mailing list filter I have to do it on the server
if I want the changes to automatically propagate to other clients. Otherwise
it starts getting messy.. some clients will properly update the local
folders and on the server, while others will not.. all depending on what I
happen to be using at the time and whether not I remember or have enough
time to manually copy rules around.

It's all a PITA and things should be better then this.

Not to also mention that email clients on "Desktop Linux" suck. Evolution is
the only one that has the features that typical users expect nowadays, but
it's a not programmed well.

(Log in to post comments)

The notmuch mail client

Posted Nov 18, 2009 2:23 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

> I'm not sure what you include as "features typical users expect nowadays",
> but I find Kmail to be quite featureful, and there certainly others.

Well MAPI support would be a big one.

The notmuch mail client

Posted Nov 18, 2009 6:47 UTC (Wed) by magfr (guest, #16052) [Link]

You mean like this?

The notmuch mail client

Posted Nov 18, 2009 11:26 UTC (Wed) by nye (guest, #51576) [Link]

I would normally expect 'typical users' to mean 'home desktop users', in which case MAPI support is irrelevant - who runs their own Exchange server?

I presume you are thinking rather about the sort of features that might encourage large-scale corporate deployment?

I kind of think this is leaving the realm of mail clients though. MAPI clients (without using nasty hacks, are there any other than Outlook?) aren't really the same thing as mail clients to my mind.

While Outlook is *technically* a mail client, it's about the worst you're ever likely to find (with the exception of Evolution once you start paying attention to things like performance and stability), but it's not really meant to be its function, per se, just one of its features. (It's interesting that Outlook does everything badly - but it does several things all together, which makes people happy)

Jack of many trades

Posted Nov 18, 2009 19:00 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

I use it at work, and "happy" is not the word. "Constantly bothered by it, but not sufficiently annoyed to actively fight it" is more like it. And the bloody calendar is not that bad if you have, say, 10--20 meetings a week. Yeah, my life sucks :(

Many people fail to understand the fundamental truth behind your wise statement: if your software doesn't do X, corporate buyers will not even consider it. It can be badly done, not scale and generally be poorly engineered, but do whatever they want it to do and suddenly you are eligible. Sounds reasonable, right? The vast majority of people are not able to see beyond the "what" and into the "how".

The notmuch mail client

Posted Nov 18, 2009 2:52 UTC (Wed) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Oh, and thanks for bring up seive. That's something I've been wanting for a
while now.