Re: [Evolution-hackers] camel->split in? eds or not

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo novell com>]

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 20:07 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> 
> This is a mail i sent internally before, JP asked me to bounce it out,
> others might have contributions to make here.
> 
> 
> There are some compelling reasons for putting camel in eds, but also
> several for not doing it.
> 
> in: 
>       * Camel depends on some minor things in e-util.  E-util will
>         almost certainly have to end up as part of e-d-s so that you
>         can build consistent ui's to access e-d-s data outside of
>         evolution, for account managment etc.  Most probably eplugin
>         will end up there.  etc.  e_iconv would go into e-util if gal
>         is dispanded (if g* still doesn't provide enough
>         functionality).  If e-util is there, camel could also be
>         there. 
>       * Some things in e-d-s need to talk mime and/or need to talk
>         mail, so they should presumably use camel for that, even if
>         they need to be redirected through some corba object. 
>       * Fewer packages to maintain.
> 
I would add:
	* a single package for accessing all evolution data.
-- 
Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo novell com>