Open r-raymond opened 6 years ago
Personally I gravitate towards the simpler solution. I would keep additions like that as part of SNM at first, perhaps in say an "extras.nix" file to emphasize their supplemental nature. If need be they can still be factored out into an own nixos-mailserver-extras repository without losing anything.
What about package choices?
For caldav we already have an implementation with radicale, so if there is no objection to using radicale I'm fine using that. As a bonus radicale can also do carddav.
Here's my two cents on the subject: Since we don't offer choices for core parts of the mailserver, say postfix vs. exim, kresd vs. unbound, etc. and have had no issues with that so far, I fail to see the need to divert from that course for non-essential things such as caldav. Again if need be we can still make that more sophisticated, but I'd rather start simple and make things complex when required than adding (and paying for) the complexity from the very beginning.
To me it seems that Nixos caters especially well to refactoring in configurations since it allows for doing things in a more high level way. This gives leeway for changing things under the hood (e.g. what nameserver do we use). To give an example, this is why I chose to call the option localDnsResolver
and not useKresd
.
This does of course assume that the people who use NMS are welcoming this level of abstraction ("drive me to the airport") vs. a lower abstraction ("take the next right, then go left"). From the reactions I observed so far this seems to be true. Opinions?
I agree. My question was more geared towards "what packages should we use" rather than "should we provide options" though.
I think the options are:
The obvious advantages of Radicale are:
Advantages of Baïkal:
Disadvantages of DAViCal:
Questions:
See also #72