cocoaforge

mark2000 wrote:

evands wrote: Mail.app + GrowlMail. GrowlMail ships with the full Growl package (www.growl.info).

But that would require Mail to be open all the time. Not all of us want a 15mb app running all the time, esp when we've got a lot of power hungry stuff running already for work, etc. As I said, Aduim is already open 24/7 and already checks mail. It only makes sense to implement full mail checking in a similar fashion.

DId you read my post above?

In any case, we certainly would not stop someone from implementing a general mail checker plugin for Adium. I wouldn't stop an Adium developer who chose to create such a plugin. You're not, however, going to see this included in a default build of Adium nor see it targeted or encouraged for development by the team.

Seriously guys, you're so light on the new features front.

Wow. You seriously can say that after we've just released Adium 1.0 after over a year in development?

We all accept that video and audio are never coming.

Incorrect.

All we could need is some extra mail checking and address book integration

Out of curiosity... what about Adium's current address book integration is insufficient for you?

A couple of points. I think this debate really boils down to what the scope of Adium is, and what software development is about. We're going back and forth with users from time to time who want their pet feature to be implemented in Adium, and will say anything they can to get it.

For the most part this does nothing more but cause aggravation on both sides. On our side we get aggravated when a user starts down this path. We say no continuously, and then they attempt to convince us in any way they can think of that Adium "absolutely needs this and then Adium is finished!" or some other random saying like that.

On the users side, it looks like the developer sucks. They don't budge an inch, who the hell do they think they are to never fulfill my request.


This is why we have a plugin api. We don't expect that everyone knows how to code, but we do expect people to be courteous to us when we provide them the tools to get what they need. If you don't know how to code, one can assume that you can use some of your skills to persuade someone to do what you need. Whether this is done by convincing someone only by talking to them, or by cash, it doesn't matter, the capability to modify Adium for your needs is there.

We do not have the resources to fulfill every request we get. We have to decide what we should and should not do. pop3 checking is not within the scope of what we should be doing, since there are tools that do it better than we can do it. As such, we will not be providing this feature out of the box, and you will need to provide this on your own in whatever fashion you deem necessary.

There is so much more to the mail functionality that is being requested than you're suggesting. Some of the things such as headers and sorting have already been mentioned, but there's also a lot more things such as threading, mailbox subscriptions, filters, rules, configuration options, security protocols, etc. Adium is nowhere near poised to add this functionality; the devs would pretty much have to write an entire separate mail application and tie it into Adium somehow. And even IF they did that, it would be nowhere as complete or efficient as the Mail.app/Growl combo. On another note, how can you complain about leaving Mail.app open all the time, but it's OK for Adium? That makes no sense at all. Adium is much busier when it's open than Mail.app, and is using more resources as a result. Opening my activity monitor, I see Mail.app using 0.00% CPU and 5.22 MB of RAM. That's it. On the other hand, Adium is using 1.00% CPU and 25.65 MB of RAM for me. Neither of them are all that significant, but if you're gonna complain about one of them, it certainly shouldn't be Mail.app. Why don't you go to Apple and ask them to integrate full-featured IM into Mail.app?

As an Adium user, I would be MUCH more pleased if the devs used their time to work on creating and improving IM functionalities than adding something like this.

Sorry about the tangent, but I feel this must be answered.

There are some key things you are missing about Adium development. Adium is open source and free. The developers have absolutely no obligation to appease their users in any way. For the most part, OSS developers create their apps for themselves, and not for their users. In many ways, if one were to take the Adium's user base, and prune off everyone who didn't contribute to the project in any way (which will, undoubtedly, be most of the users), then the app would be the same as it is today.

mark2000 wrote:

bgannin wrote: B) Last I checked, we wrote and designed the software and it's our right to make the determinations of what goes in.

That's a very sandbox mentality. I would think, as a developer, you have SOME accountability to your users and their needs.

Nope, none! Pay for it, and then you can expect accountability, but until then, absolutely none! Remember, "you get what you pay for," but in this case, you actually get a whole lot more.

mark2000 wrote:

bgannin wrote: C) We've detailed a full plugin API and continue to do so, as well as encourage and help plugin authors as much as possible. We (the Adium development team) aren't likely to take our time on such a project, and it will not be in the release, as indicated. That said, it's not we are actively stopping someone from doing so, just not us. It's open source, have a party

The "why don't you program it yourself" argument is always the absolute worst. Its elitist. Not everyone has your gifts, nor should they be expected to. If everyone should be able to program then you should stop asking artists to do your skins and icons.

Actually, it really isn't. It is more of a "We aren't going to do it because we don't care about it. If you really care about it, then you need to program it yourself, otherwise it will not be done." This is not elitist, just showing you the last remaining recourse.

mark2000 wrote:

bgannin wrote: D) This is likely not the right foot to start off on in a forum, honestly.

Sorry, but I just hate dismissive open-source developers. They start out with socialist style ideals, but then become the same dinosaurs as the commercial vendors. I've seen it in so many so called "open source" projects. "We'll never do this or that". Ok, well don't expect people to be happy about it or to appreciate your disparaging and holier than thou attitude. Amen!

Sorry if I come off a bit like a free market economist here, but I think it applies. People are selfish, and OSS developers are really not all that different. They do something because they get some sort of utility out of it. Most OSS developers use the programs they develop, and as such they improve it in order to improve their own user experience. The advantage of open sourcing it is that they might get other developers to join in and do the same thing. Thus, they end up sharing their resources with each other. Now, there is some utility to the pride of having an app that a large number of people use (the larger, the more pride), but this by itself is not enough to be the entire motivation. If you wish an OSS developer to work on something which which doesn't coincide with their wishes, you must appeal to their sense of utility. This can be showing them that most of their users want this, or that they will gain much more (appeal to their pride), or pay them to do it. Otherwise, expect to hit a brick wall.


Now, on to the real point of this thread. Evan said it best, but maybe incomplete:

evands wrote:Mail.app + GrowlMail. GrowlMail ships with the full Growl package (www.growl.info).

There already is a great solution out there that does exactly this. Why should Adium duplicate these efforts? Furthermore, why should Adium expand into a realm which is really beyond its current function? Where does this expansion stop? Do we replace Finder with Adium? Are we going to write the Adium OS?

Adium Website wrote:Adium is a free instant messaging application for Mac OS X that can connect to AIM, MSN, Jabber, Yahoo, and more.

Adium is a great IM client and should remain so. Say it gets to the point where there is nothing else it can do related to IM. At that point, its development should stop. Let Adium do what it does best, and leave other operations to other apps. It is better to be good at one thing than to be a "Jack of all trades; master of none".

You mentioned you were looking for a simple mail checker.
Here's some i found with a quick look:
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/7513/hpop
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/5397/mail-beacon
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/6467/notifymail-x

bgannin wrote: That's fine, I recognize others don't have my gifts - that's why I volunteer them. That does not, however, give anyone (leads and managers excepting) the right to determine how I employ that donated time.

But you still don't factor in your user base. I don't understand how a software can exist completely outside of user desires especially one that has grown as fully as this one. It's not your pet project anymore. It belongs to the world. To say to the 7 or 8 threads on this topic already that it will never happen when it can't possibly be that big a deal is unreasonably closed minded.

Tell me what exactly the effort would be to create a plugin that would allow a user to check multiple POP3s on a defined minute interval and be notified just like any other mail (and perhaps with a change in the menubar icon). If it really requires that much I'd be utterly shocked.

m2e wrote:You mentioned you were looking for a simple mail checker.
Here's some i found with a quick look:
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/7513/hpop
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/5397/mail-beacon
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/6467/notifymail-x

Thanks for doing the research, but the first two are PPC abandonwares that haven't been updated in years and don't work with Tiger. The last one doesn't work with commercial ISPs. Its setup and requirements are extremely complex. So there still is no viable solution.

mark2000 wrote:

bgannin wrote: That's fine, I recognize others don't have my gifts - that's why I volunteer them. That does not, however, give anyone (leads and managers excepting) the right to determine how I employ that donated time.

But you still don't factor in your user base. I don't understand how a software can exist completely outside of user desires especially one that has grown as fully as this one. It's not your pet project anymore. It belongs to the world. To say to the 7 or 8 threads on this topic already that it will never happen when it can't possibly be that big a deal is unreasonably closed minded.

Tell me what exactly the effort would be to create a plugin that would allow a user to check multiple POP3s on a defined minute interval and be notified just like any other mail (and perhaps with a change in the menubar icon). If it really requires that much I'd be utterly shocked.

Bzzt, wrong answer. Our trac system is filled with hundreds of tickets requesting functionality that we ourselves may or may not care about, but it is reviewed for merit and inclusion the same as any other. Yours is but another of those, it's no more special than any other request.

You seem to think the impetus is our lack of desire to do what 'seems so simple' - it's not. You can't on one hand say we have gifts to employ that others don't and then in the next breath state that whatever you want us to do is simple. We have the technical knowhow, as you state, so let us make our determinations.

And before you continue down the path of 'we don't think of users' I'd recommend looking over the last dozen or so revisions of the product - we've added many things to facilitate user requests (Fire and iChat importers, Spotlight support, new tab layouts, accessibility [from GSoC], ad infinitum) and have even had work done based on users. Just a few days ago Zac coded in a more complete set up for nudge support based on a thread in this forum and there's also menubar skinning in 1.1 which goes from user hack to fully supported Xtra. How dare you say we don't care and listen?

Bottom line: your pet request will not be addressed no matter what tactic you take.

Also, our responsibility is to balance the functionality, code, and design of an application used by millions, much like Apple, and we have the unenviable task of determining what balance is good (the 80/20 rule, as it were). It's not an armchair sport, and not done lightly. Coming in and assuming you can do the same is partly were you are drawing umbrage.

bgannin wrote:Also, our responsibility is to balance the functionality, code, and design of an application used by millions, much like Apple, and we have the unenviable task of determining what balance is good (the 80/20 rule, as it were). It's not an armchair sport, and not done lightly. Coming in and assuming you can do the same is partly were you are drawing umbrage.

Frankly this just leads to the zealotry factor. You yourself don't like the idea for reasons that are completely unknown to me. You therefore dismiss it out of hand. You make it seem like its my pet interest and yet its pretty well represented on this forum. You are drawing umbrage from the fact that you arbitrarily say "We will consider this. We will never consider this". Obviously this is important to many, but you dismiss it out of hand, and how dare it even be brought up. Really, is that the way to speak to your users? Read through the thread again as well as others on this topic and see how rude you and your compatriots are in response. You don't even ignore it, you go out of your way to say "What are you kidding? In your dreams, pal!".

Actually, 7 or 8 threads is very low representation for a feature.

mark2000 wrote:You don't even ignore it, you go out of your way to say "What are you kidding? In your dreams, pal!".

This is a catch 22.

- If we do say something, we're seen as jerks.

- If we don't say anything, we're seen as unresponsive.

I'd rather have the former than the latter.



Adium is not an email client, it's an IM client. It happens to have a plugin api. This functionality is possible, but would need to be done by a third party.

Please stop harassing the developers.

For the record I'm not at all ashamed that I'm an "Adium zealot" in the same way that I'm not ashamed I'm an "Apple zealot." Looking at the Oxford entries in Mac OS X's Dictionary we find:

Zealot
noun
a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in pursuit of their religious, political, or other ideals.

Fanaticism
(abridged)
• [often with adj. ] informal a person with an obsessive interest in and enthusiasm for something, esp. an activity : a fitness fanatic.

From "The Right Word" within the "zealot" entry:

A zealot exhibits not only extreme devotion but vehement activity in support of a cause or goal (: a feminist zealot who spent most of her time campaigning for women's rights).

I'm in agreement with The_Tick. I'm sorry you feel as you do; we've discussed and considered the idea publicly in these threads, though not to the end you wished. I'm done posting in this particular one.

mark2000 wrote:Frankly this just leads to the zealotry factor. You yourself don't like the idea for reasons that are completely unknown to me. You therefore dismiss it out of hand. You make it seem like its my pet interest and yet its pretty well represented on this forum. You are drawing umbrage from the fact that you arbitrarily say "We will consider this. We will never consider this". Obviously this is important to many, but you dismiss it out of hand, and how dare it even be brought up. Really, is that the way to speak to your users? Read through the thread again as well as others on this topic and see how rude you and your compatriots are in response. You don't even ignore it, you go out of your way to say "What are you kidding? In your dreams, pal!".

I don't mind discussing these issues.

First, you seem to use the word zealot in a way that references "religious zealots" - typically this term implies that the religious people are closed-minded and can't process logical argument. That is not the case here at all. They have provided their reasons, but you don't accept their reasons as logical or reasonable.

Second, this idea is not casually dismissed out of hand. Adium supports a wide range of IM protocols with unique features for each. I am not a developer, but I've been hanging around here even before Adium went multi-protocol, and I can tell you that the developers very carefully consider all the decisions that are made. Even though it may appear they are dismissing them easily, it is actually because the devs have a very intimate knowledge of a) their capabilities and resources, b) the needs of the community, and c) software design in general.

Third, it's not very well represented on this forum. It comes up every once in a while. Much more popular things include sending MSN custom emoticons and voice/video.

Fourth, Adium is designed for instant messaging. That is its focus - supporting IM protocol features. POP3 access is completely outside the realm of instant messaging. It doesn't even need to be linked to an IM account. Handling POP3 in this fashion goes against the design of the software. You might argue that you believe POP3 IS a part of the design of the software, but if that's the case, what about RSS? What about an appointment tracker? I guess the question is who gets to make the decisions about what a certain piece of software will do or not do. In this case, Adium's design clearly indicates that Adium is built to support IM protocol services, not "things that are always running" services. POP3 is NOT part of any IM protocol.

Before Adium went multiprotocol, Adium was laden with all sorts of features that users requested. Anarchy took its toll, however, and the result was a weird, funky AIM client that had an extremely confusing and bizarre set of preferences - support of every feature was incredibly difficult, users complained left and right, etc. What turned Adium around was a strong decision on the part of the developers to enforce a very clear, streamlined design methodology through the entire program.

This sort of strong developer leadership appears to irk you because you don't get the features you want. In the end, the truth is that too many cooks spoil the broth. That's why Apple is praised for its unified interface design, and why Linux is too confusing and difficult for most people. If Adium becomes more than just an IM client, then perhaps you will see POP3 support, and RSS support, and brewing coffee support, etc. But for now, I don't really see those things happening.

Fifth, you claim Mail takes up more resources. I would argue that keeping Mail.app not running except for when you need to send/view a message takes up more resources. (Opening/quitting dozens of times a day, additional network overhead, etc.) I don't know what kind of computer you have, but RAM is pretty much the only resource issue you're dealing with, and unless you're running on 256 MB of RAM on a G3 iMac I don't see what the resource hog is. Programs fluctuate in RAM usage so easily that 15 MB really is trivial. I think about these things too; I have iPulse running at all times because I intensely care about my system responsiveness, and I'll tell you it'd be better for Mail to be constantly open than for me to quit it and start it up every time I wanted to do something.

Plus, by the way, quitting and restarting Mail constantly would be cumbersome. I think it makes handling mail annoying, not easy.

Sixth, supporting POP3 accounts is intensely more complicated than you think. Encryption plays a factor, different mailbox configurations, etc. is a factor as well. Plus POP3 wouldn't be enough - you'd need to check IMAP accounts as well. In fact there are whole applications written to deal with email. You might think that this is STILL trivial, but people find problems with every single feature in Adium that doing POP3/IMAP work would simply open a huge can of worms. A HUGE can of worms.