Re: Does KMail require Akonadi?

On 2 July 2020 19:55:10 BST, David Jarvie <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.

Sorry, I made a mistake in which version of Debian I'm running - I'm actually running Jessie. So the bug I mentioned may not apply to Wheezy.

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