[Kolab-devel] Kolab CF

Andreas Gungl a.gungl at gmx.de
Wed Jan 21 20:25:05 CET 2004

Hash: SHA1

On Dienstag, 20. Januar 2004 10:24, Stephan Buys wrote:
> The main differences as far as I can tell are as follows:
> 1) zfos uses pure OpenPKG-current packages, the erfrakon releases have
> some packages with patches which diverge from OpenPKG. I cant say for
> sure, but I think that most of the important patches from erfrakon have
> been integrated into OpenPKG-current.
> 2) The zfos distribution uses the obmtool scripts to install Kolab, where
> the erfrakon release uses the QIM.
> 3) The zfos distribution uses only the native rc (startup and shutdown)
> scripts with the builtin OpenPKG mechanisms, where the in the erfrakon
> release the process is handled by the rc.kolab script (although monit was
> supposed to manage this, but never worked consistently)
> There are a couple of minor differences and tweaks, but the two dont
> differ too much. zfos tends to use more recent packages as well.

Well, these are things I could certainly live with.

> > Does that mean you will provide a new package at
> > http://www.erfrakon.de/projects/kolab/download/kolab-webclient/ (and a
> > short instruction how to
> > install it over the previous package)?
> Because there are extra dependencies which we didn't have time to address
> the new web client will only work with the zfos/kolab-cf releases.
> (Needed some extra libraries and mysql)
> The download will be available from the zfos site and there will be
> instructions available on how to install the components.

Hm, IMO the main benefit of Kolab was that I don't need a database system 
installed. I guess you don't plan to separate the part which would need the 
MySQL database from the rest of the changes which could be used without the 
If I only knew how Martin is going to continue here... I mean, somehow the 
changes resp. improvements get hopefully merged back into 
kolab-<whatever-kroupware-is-called> so we should be able to expect an 
improved version of it too.

> > Unfortunatly information on kolab.kde.org about ongoing develpment are
> > rare.
> This could be seen in a positive light as well, Kolab works so well
> because of the efforts of the Kroupware project, that no improvements are
> necesarry ;-) 

Good joke. :-)
Well, Kolab is certainly good as it is. Otherwise I would not had given it a 
try in our company. The problem is that people can accept some rough edges 
in the beginning because they think that polishing those things will not 
take too long. IIRC Kolab is about one year old and since it didn't change 
too much. I hoped I could use some (even minor) improvements from your work 
(administration, web fronend), but having to install MySQL on that server 
will create discussions I had better avoided.
Nevertheless, I don't intend to put any pressure on you, I'm only trying to 
explain my situation.

> I will personally try to help improve  this situation, but
> it takes a lot of time and its not always possible.

I want to thank you and everybody involved in Kolab development for your 
work. I hope my contributions to KMail/Kontact will provide some benefit 
for Kolab as well even if the projects are not directly related.

- -- 
  ' v '
 //   \\
/(     )\  Powered by Penguin.
  ^ ' ^

Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)


More information about the devel mailing list