Is lumail a stepping stone?

Monday, 14 April 2014

I'm pondering a rewrite of my console-based mail-client.

While it is "popular" it is not popular.

I suspect "console-based" is the killer.

I like console, and I ssh to a remote server to use it, but having different front-ends would be neat.

In the world of mailpipe, etc, is there room for a graphic console client? Possibly.

The limiting factor would be the lack of POP3/IMAP.

Reworking things such that there is a daemon to which a GUI, or a console client, could connect seems simple. The hard part would obviously be working the IPC and writing the GUI. Any toolkit selected would rule out 40% of the audience.

In other news I'm stalling on replying to emails. Irony.



Comments On This Entry

[gravitar] Leandro Penz

Submitted at 23:40:29 on 13 april 2014

You can also make it web-based.
Oh wait...

[gravitar] niol

Submitted at 07:36:12 on 14 april 2014

Web-based for desktop apps is a good idea. Like the transmission bittorrent client or the git-annex assistant.

[gravitar] Florian

Submitted at 08:31:02 on 14 april 2014

Web-based for desktop apps is a bad idea. Like GMail. It's one tab out of 10-50 in a browser instance. There's no mental switch, it's still "the browser" - and even unable to use alt-tab to instantly switch to it is a KO criterion for me.

I love native apps (and I just haven't come around to trying lumail) and I've been using Thunderbird nearly since it's inception.

[gravitar] Richard Hartmann

Submitted at 10:13:25 on 14 april 2014

More than the lack of a GUI, I feel the lack of IMAP/SMTP is the main issue.

With current SSDs, I can not justify carrying around dozens of GiB of mail I almost never need. At least for my use cases, IMAP is an absolute must and unless luamail supports that, I can't even consider switching.

With Alpine dead in the water and my dislike of mutt, I would love to have another MUA to choose from...

[author] Steve Kemp

Submitted at 10:18:24 on 14 april 2014

I have zero interest in a web-view, but I guess it could be contributed (ha).

The IMAP support is something that a lot of people miss, and I can see why. Personally I use offlineimap at times, and that works, but I can see the downside too.

Really my code is focussed on local folder access, and that is so deeply engrained it is hard to change. If I had to write IMAP code I suspect I'd never have reached a workable product/project. But I do wish I'd made it easier to add in.

For the moment I'm making no changes, but I suspect an evolution is inevitable. IMAP has to be added, no matter how distasteful and complicated it becomes.

[gravitar] Andreas Schamanek

Submitted at 10:53:25 on 14 april 2014

FUSE imapfs?

Couldn't find any active projects, however, I found one with a cute idea: A scripting language as FUSE wrapper around whatever IMAP library we got (and that works cause implementing IMAP is a PIA, IMHO).

[gravitar] anon

Submitted at 11:36:38 on 14 april 2014

Having to run a daemon on your own server also keeps the potential audience very small. I'm keeping an eye on laumail but I can't run it since I neither have my own mailserver to ssh into nor want to download each and every mail with fetchmail/offlineimap while I'm on the road. Why not support IMAP4 (POP3 does not have much relevance today) directly?
There is a distinct lack of a console MUA with support for modern IMAP, e.g. something like Trojita with a TUI.

[gravitar] Nux

Submitted at 13:35:06 on 15 april 2014

I've stuck with Cone for the last years, it's doing a good job, though not as flexible as Mutt or Alpine. It might be an option for others, too.

Re Lumail, since I can no longer build it on EL6 (and hence use it) this could be good news.


Comments are closed on posts which are more than ten days old.

Recent Posts

Recent Tags