From: Eric Wong Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 03:40:33 +0000 (+0000) Subject: doc: design_notes: updates for "newer" things X-Git-Tag: v1.7.0~3 X-Git-Url: http://www.git.stargrave.org/?p=public-inbox.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=174588f860f4ecda1896559928b6c72bf2857832 doc: design_notes: updates for "newer" things public-inbox-imapd, public-inbox-watch, and marketing.txt all exist, now. --- diff --git a/Documentation/design_notes.txt b/Documentation/design_notes.txt index 71f6b77a..3df5af3e 100644 --- a/Documentation/design_notes.txt +++ b/Documentation/design_notes.txt @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Use existing infrastructure * public-inbox can coexist with existing mailing lists, any subscriber to the existing mailing list can begin delivering messages to - public-inbox-mda(1) + public-inbox-mda(1) or public-inbox-watch(1) * public-inbox uses SMTP for posting. Posting a message to a public-inbox instance is no different than sending a message to any _open_ mailing @@ -72,11 +72,12 @@ Why git? * git is distributed and robust while being both fast and space-efficient with text data. NNTP was considered, but does not support delta-compression and places no guarantees on data/transport - integrity. However, a read-only NNTP gateway is implemented. + integrity. However, read-only IMAP and NNTP gateways are implemented. * As of 2016, git is widely used and known to nearly all Free Software developers. For non-developers it is packaged for all major GNU/Linux - and *BSD distributions. NNTP is not as widely-used nowadays. + and *BSD distributions. NNTP is not as widely-used nowadays, and + most IMAP clients do not have good support for read-only mailboxes. Why perl 5? ----------- @@ -142,6 +143,8 @@ What sucks about public-inbox * some (mostly GUI) mail clients cannot set In-Reply-To headers properly without the original message. +* marketing - as it should: + Scalability notes ----------------- @@ -151,5 +154,5 @@ problems solved. Copyright --------- -Copyright 2013-2021 all contributors +Copyright all contributors License: AGPL-3.0+