[Kolab-devel] Kolab Support for the Toltec Connector

[Joon Radley]

Hi Bernhard,

> > > As someone who has administered a variety of multilingual mail
> > > systems, I concur with the judgement that the MS solution is
> > > moronic.
> > >
> > :-( <*bows head in shame, moron, moron, moron*>
> 
> As you seem to take this a bit personally.

No I don't. I have a thick skin, it will take more than this to get me down. :-)

> Did you actually implement or design that feature of OL? ;-)

No, but I do agree with it. I believe that the server must be the ultimate authority. The client must only present what is on the server. Creating client side mapping means that the server is not the utimate authority. Each person can agree or disagree with this. 

You tell me what you think is the best mail server on Linux. On a LUG mailing list this will start a debate that is totaly amazing :-)

> > But what about sub folders? When a user creates a sub folder with a
> > arbitrary name, how will this be translated? Babel Fish or 
> will users only
> > be allowed to create sub folders from a list of approved 
> folder names?
> >
> > Until such a standard becomes reality each client is going 
> to implement its
> > own solution. Take the model put forward by Bo. Each folder must be
> > manually mapped to folder type and translated. This must be 
> done for each
> > install and reinstall.
> 
> Well we can set the Kolab standard
> and then at least all clients can be tested to be compatible or not.
> So if we come up with a good solution, others will try to be 
> compatible.

But what if each group set its own standard? There will be "standards" all over the place and still no one will be able to speak to each other. 

Maybe a RFC is the way to go?

> > This create a few problem for me.
> >
> > 1)If I have to tell a system administrator that if a virus 
> strikes his
> > organization he will have to reinstall, map folder types 
> and rename folders
> > for 2000 clients, he will not buy my product. ( Actually he will die
> > laughing. )
> 
> Why that? Would a virus attack delete folders or the mappings?

No, they would attach the client OS. Reinstall, reinstall, reinstall. In windows, viruses are a reality. I worked on anti-virus software at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in South Africa. Trust me on this.

> > 2)I have to adhere to the limitation set to me by Outlook. 
> I need to now
> > what type a folder is when creating it. Normal users will 
> not know how to
> > map this folder and so they will phone the administrator. ( As an
> > administrator you can image handling 3000 calls like this. 
> Been there, done
> > that. )
> 
> Does that mean that you could not influence the folder name Outlook
> will create with your plugin? 
> It is not comfortable, that is true.

Folder name yes, folder type no.

> > We can argue about the best/ideal model to do this. This, 
> however, does not
> > bring me closer to supporting the Kolab clients.
> 
> Currently both clients just have to know what folder names they use.
> And those standard folder then just work.
> For the next revision of the Kolab standard we could come up with
> a better solution.

Cannot wait.

I think the Kolab server is brilliant. From the first time I downloaded it and used it, I was hooked.

I would love to be able to support the Kolab Clients. But keep in mind that this is a massive development on our side. Translating MAPI <-> iCal/vCard and incorporating this into the connector will take us approx. 6 months. And after all this I will have a product that I cannot sell. MS users/admins will not accept this model.

Somewhere there must be a middle ground. Solomon where are you!

Regards

Joon