Re: Does KMail require Akonadi?

On Thursday 02 Jul 2020 08:02:14 [email protected] wrote:
> Sorry for hijacking this thread, but this may be a good time / set of people
> to ask"
> 
> I currently use kmail 1.13.7 on kde 4.8.4 (on Debian Wheezy) as my daily
> (email) driver.  I have Nepomuk (or whatever it uses shut off.)
> 
> I have something like 500k old emails in folders and probably see (or not
> see ;-) 300 to 1000 emails per day.
> 
> I'm a little afraid to move off kmail 1.13.7 for a variety of reasons, but
> among them the problems I hear related to akonadi and, presumably, the
> associated problems with handling fairly large quantities of emails.
> 
> So, my question is this -- if I'd upgrade to Buster and try to use the kmail
> version there (5.9.3), how likely am I to have problems?

I also use kmail on Debian Wheezy. I use IMAP, but often move emails from IMAP 
folders into local folders. I've noticed that many of these emails in local 
folders only exist in Akonadi, and have not been stored as files on disk (which 
is a bug). So if you use a similar setup, don't upgrade before ensuring that 
all your locally stored emails have actually been saved to disk; otherwise 
they will be lost. I've found that copying instead of moving emails into local 
folders seems to fix this problem.

-- 
David Jarvie.
KDE developer.
KAlarm author -- http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm