Re: new modules consensus

[David Malcolm <dmalcolm redhat com>]

On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 10:23 -0400, JP Rosevear wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 14:06 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >  - libsoup
> >    gal
> >    gtkhtml
> >    evolution-data-server
> >    evolution
> >    evolution-exchange
> > 
> >      (No make sense to considering any of these independently, right?)
> > 
> >      Discussion on i18n issues, lots of strings, big database of strings
> >      for Location names and the like. Seems that these issues have been 
> >      greatly reduced, people are relatively happy and the Evolution team
> >      work well with the i18n team on such issues.
> > 
> >      People would like to see Evolution move to GNOME bugzilla, but 
> >      there is a recognition that it is a big task. This should happen,
> >      though, and the sooner the better but no-one seems to consider a
> >      blocker.
> 
> This is being worked on, but as mentioned earlier we can't do it in time
> for 2.8.
> 
> >      Some discussion on removing the Evolution "brand" from the 
> >      interface, what its menu entry should be and the like ... The
> >      debate seemed to peter out with no agreement, but it also didn't
> >      look like an issue which would block Evolution's acceptance.
> 
> We removed the use of "Ximian Evolution" every where.  If there needs to
> be generic menu entries, we can do that.

IIRC the documentation still contains some Novell (and Ximian) branding
- I'd prefer it if this was removed as well.

> 
> >      Evolution 1.5 doesn't use the new fileselector because it doesn't 
> >      want to depend on GTK+ 2.4. There was discussion about adding a 
> >      #ifdef patch and the Evolution team was happy to have that happen
> >      so long as someone was willing to do the work. However, that
> >      doesn't seem to have happened. I think it was obvious that most
> >      people found this a huge disappointment, but that most were willing
> >      to accept it so long as it is indicative of a trend for the future.
> 
> Not quite right, Carlos has done the work (thanks), we've had a few
> issues with the patch, we'll have it in for the next release on Monday.
> 
> -JP