[sup-talk] rethinking sup part ii

From: terence.namusonge@gmail.com (teroz)
Subject: [sup-talk] rethinking sup part ii
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 11:27:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1f7abd640807230227v75c28a62v6c299242a9bf3303@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1216803452-sup-8333@port-ext16.ensta.fr>

Well surely if we r eschewing typical mail storage formats like mbox and
IMAP then a database is the way to go
unless your suggesting we write some form of storage library as well.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Nicolas Pouillard <
nicolas.pouillard at gmail.com> wrote:

> Excerpts from Richard Heycock's message of Wed Jul 23 10:45:06 +0200 2008:
> > Excerpts from William Morgan's message of Mon Jul 21 07:33:24 +1000 2008:
> > > In which the new version of Sup is described!
> > >
> > > http://all-thing.net/2008/07/rethinking-sup-part-ii.html
> >
> > I really like the idea and I have to say that I'm *very* glad that you
> > are keeping the ncurses interface.
> >
> > My one concern is that you are thinking of using Sphinx and as a
> > consequence you are relient on a relational database. Is that really
> > what you want for a mail client? I find this disturbing on two levels:
> > having a full blown database system for email seems like overkill and
> > the idea of an index bring based on a relational model quite appaling.
> >
> > There are a number of other indexs such as Xapian or Hyper Estraier
> > both have ruby bindings and both are quite mature and widely used in
> > other projects.
>
> I'm also concerned by using relying on relational databases for a mail
> service.
>
> --
> Nicolas Pouillard aka Ertai
>
> _______________________________________________
> sup-talk mailing list
> sup-talk at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk
>
>

-- 
--Teroz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/sup-talk/attachments/20080723/0dfa1626/attachment.html>