Connect. Communicate. Collaborate. Securely.

Home » Kerio User Forums » Kerio Connect » Feature Request Discussion
  •  
keywerks

Messages: 73
Karma: -2
Send a private message to this user
Hi all,

I would like to discuss a feature request, before I put it to the right channels. So it would be very nice to get as much as feedback as possible.

After talking to several of our clients having their mailserver hosted by us, we found out the domain signature of KMS should be more flexible.

The idea is to replace the current domain signature function by a list with (unlimited) signatures per domain and the possibility to activate them by a given tag or keyword in the mail body. So companies can decide by themselves what kind of signature is included. Additionally adding images to all of the signatures should be possible too.

What do you think about it?

Thanks a lot for your response.

*************************************
PHPStar - the missing gear in your web engine
Visit http://phpstar.keywerks.de
*************************************
  •  
keywerks

Messages: 73
Karma: -2
Send a private message to this user
Okay, thanks for our interest. Nice to see the community is still alive.

*************************************
PHPStar - the missing gear in your web engine
Visit http://phpstar.keywerks.de
*************************************
  •  
jshaw541

Messages: 471
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
keywerks wrote on Sat, 06 October 2007 11:56

Okay, thanks for our interest. Nice to see the community is still alive.


We don't really have any need for that feature, but submit it anyway!

Kerio MailServer 6.7.1 w/AD
Windows Server 2003 SP 1
Dell PowerEdge 2850 (Dual Xeon 3.2ghz and 2 GB RAM)
~1300 users
~1000+ concurrent IMAPS connections
iPhone users
Outlook 2007 KOFF users
Apple iCal 10.5/10.6 users
  •  
Nixs

Messages: 159
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
We have no desire for that. We utilize other products infront of Kerio which have this ability. We could re-write %%myfooter1%% to include a specific footer using these other products for inbound/outbound e-mail...

But we only use a minimal subset of options. One company has one text footer, another has a different footer. Nothing complex.

Most of our people stick their own footer in using Outlook.

KOC caching is my #1, #2, and #3 desired options. Better searching #4.
  •  
keywerks

Messages: 73
Karma: -2
Send a private message to this user
Nixs wrote on Tue, 09 October 2007 20:26

We have no desire for that. We utilize other products infront of Kerio which have this ability. We could re-write %%myfooter1%% to include a specific footer using these other products for inbound/outbound e-mail...

What kind of product do you use to realize this?

*************************************
PHPStar - the missing gear in your web engine
Visit http://phpstar.keywerks.de
*************************************
  •  
cachedmode

Messages: 62
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user

We have no desire for that.

In fact we are still foolishly hoping for KOC cached mode to arrive.
  •  
winkelman

Messages: 2119
Karma: 3
Send a private message to this user
I (we) have no need for multiple footers, but I (we) would very much like to have a 'rich text' domain footer.
  •  
microalps

Messages: 168
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
I think the idea to the footer was not as a signature rather for companies that require statement of privacy policy, etc. There is no need for 'rich text' in such a scenario and definitely no need for variation.
  •  
winkelman

Messages: 2119
Karma: 3
Send a private message to this user
microalps wrote on Fri, 02 November 2007 19:06

I think the idea to the footer was not as a signature rather for companies that require statement of privacy policy, etc. There is no need for 'rich text' in such a scenario and definitely no need for variation.

Well, let's just say we all have our different ideas of what a domain footer could be used for and in what layout we would like to do that.
  •  
jshaw541

Messages: 471
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
What we have now for domain footers works perfectly. We definitely have no need for any multiple or rich text nonsense and I would see the implementing of that functionality as a waste of valuable Kerio engineer time.

Kerio MailServer 6.7.1 w/AD
Windows Server 2003 SP 1
Dell PowerEdge 2850 (Dual Xeon 3.2ghz and 2 GB RAM)
~1300 users
~1000+ concurrent IMAPS connections
iPhone users
Outlook 2007 KOFF users
Apple iCal 10.5/10.6 users
  •  
winkelman

Messages: 2119
Karma: 3
Send a private message to this user
Well, for us any and all substantial work on Outlook/KOC is 'a waste of time', since we don't use Outlook and never plan to. Or any work on Apple compatibility. Or any work on Linux builds. Or any work on the archiving. Or any work on the administrative capabilities through the web. Etc. etc. etc. But I respect other people using the product in different ways and don't claim those efforts to be a 'complete waste of time'.

For you the current domain footer's functionality 'works perfectly', but obviously not so for others, or they wouldn't be asking for additional features.

Please allow for others to use the product differently then you and don't claim you know what is a waste of time for all KMS customers.
  •  
cachedmode

Messages: 62
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user


I agree with the previous posts.

The domain footers are primarily used for disclaimers which are fine in plain text.

I think Kerio have more important dev issues then a rich text version of the footers.
  •  
microalps

Messages: 168
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
winkelman wrote on Tue, 06 November 2007 13:08

microalps wrote on Fri, 02 November 2007 19:06

I think the idea to the footer was not as a signature rather for companies that require statement of privacy policy, etc. There is no need for 'rich text' in such a scenario and definitely no need for variation.

Well, let's just say we all have our different ideas of what a domain footer could be used for and in what layout we would like to do that.

When I said 'the idea' I meant Kerio's idea, not necessarily the consumers 'idea'. Hope I clarified myself there.

I'm not arguing that Kerio could make a feature geared towards those 'using the product in different ways'. They simply haven't. I would recommend putting in a request for a new feature that is geared towards your use. But it's not a bug nor an improvement of an existing feature. However, given the options available to consumer, I would assume Kerio will respond that such a request is not viable on server side and should be implemented on Client Side using Outlook Signatures. And I would agree with them on that.

Same goes for images in the footer. Signatures are best implemented on the client side rather than on the server side. This gives the most flexibility for the user.
  •  
jshaw541

Messages: 471
Karma: 0
Send a private message to this user
winkelman wrote on Tue, 06 November 2007 09:07


Please allow for others to use the product differently then you and don't claim you know what is a waste of time for all KMS customers.


Hey man, we're just all adding our two cents. Everyone's got an equal voice.

And I'll assume you just misread or misunderstood "I would see the implementing of that functionality as a waste of valuable Kerio engineer time". Note the "I would see..." and that nowhere do I indicate it's a waste of time for "all users".

You need to not get so hot-headed and emotional about something as silly as mail server software and computers. At the end of the day, we should go home and leave work behind Smile

Kerio MailServer 6.7.1 w/AD
Windows Server 2003 SP 1
Dell PowerEdge 2850 (Dual Xeon 3.2ghz and 2 GB RAM)
~1300 users
~1000+ concurrent IMAPS connections
iPhone users
Outlook 2007 KOFF users
Apple iCal 10.5/10.6 users
winkelman

Messages: 2119
Karma: 3
Send a private message to this user
jshaw541 wrote on Tue, 06 November 2007 19:12

You need to not get so hot-headed and emotional about something as silly as mail server software and computers. At the end of the day, we should go home and leave work behind Smile

True true, it's just that for a year now every topic with feature requests/discussions that's not about "KOC offline! We're gonna die!" always gets sort-off hijacked.

A response like "In fact we are still foolishly hoping for KOC cached mode to arrive" has absolutely no relevance in this topic whatsoever, besides stating "my feature request is more important than yours". Which is not very helpful.

The truth is a lot of us have no use whatsoever for KOC/offline and there does not seem to be very much respect for that. And it's kind off sad for almost a year now it is quite impossible to have a topic that does not get turned in to a "we need KOC/offline yesterday" topic.

I'll go lie in the corner now, hoping KOC/offline to be here soon. I couldn't care less about it, but then hopefully we can leave all this behind and have topics about other features than KOC/offline again.
Previous Topic: Astaro Router LDAP Authentication
Next Topic: "Check names automatically" in Webmail
Goto Forum:
  


Disclaimer:
Kerio discussion forums are intended for open communication between forum members and may contain information and material posted by members which may be useful in learning about Kerio products. The discussion forums are not intended to provide technical support for any specific product. Any information implied or expressed in the discussion forums is that of the posting member. Kerio is in no way responsible for the information posted in the forums, or its accuracy. Kerio employees may participate in the discussions, but their postings do not represent an offical position of the company on any issues raised or discussed. Kerio reserves the right to monitor and maintain the forums to promote free and accurate exchange of information.

Current Time: Sat Sep 23 03:54:52 CEST 2017

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00601 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.
Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.4.