Re: [Evolution-hackers] Camel plans and possibilities
- From: Not Zed <notzed ximian com>
- To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2 infradead org>
- Cc: evolution-hackers ximian com
- Subject: Re: [Evolution-hackers] Camel plans and possibilities
- Date: 30 Jun 2003 21:02:58 +0930
On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 21:32, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 04:54, Not Zed wrote:
> > I put this (long) list together of a bunch of things that should be
> > addressed in camel.
> Please could you add the SubCommand Camel stream, an implementation of
> which I resubmitted to evolution-patches either today or a few days ago,
> depending on which was the correct address :)
Missed it (threading hides too much!) ... i'll have a look at it
tommorow i think, although most of Jeff's comments probably cover the
The CamelProcess stuff isn't complete enough to do it, but it should be
expanded to be (including overridable fork method/return so you can do
whatever ioctl's you want, etc). Either way its probably not that big
an issue, it can be retrofitted when its done (also needs to be used for
filters, sendmail, at least).
> Also 'fix flag caching w.r.t. multiple clients' as an aide-memoire for
> the IMAP rewrite -- yes, that may want to be an option since the unsafe
> optimisation is worthwhile for some people.
Yeah, good point. Must remember that one.
] [Thread Prev