Re: [Evolution-hackers] camel eds work progress

[Not Zed <notzed ximian com>]

On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 11:40 -0500, JP Rosevear wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 22:53 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> > 
> > Ok, and I had to remove groupwise from the camel build.  It was
> > including a LOT of crap it has no business including.  This needs to
> > be fixed, using plugins and whatnot, and not hacking things up in
> > camel to force it to work.
>
> Do you have a list of specifics or a list of restrictions for camel
> requirements on this?  I think we might have to make it temporarily
> fugly until the new camel groupwise provider is finished in a couple of
> weeks (uses soap instead of imap grossness).  I'm guessing the real
> nastiness is the configuration goo that could now be eplugins?

Well it uses a huge pile of crap that doesn't belong in camel.  Stuff based on gobject, e-account/e-account-list, gconf.  Some stuff from evolution's tree, like e-passwords, and e-error (which would require, at the very least libedataserverui dependencies which is totally unacceptable).

Worse, stuff from eds/servers/ which must be built after camel anyway.

So it appears fairly intractible to me.

--

Michael Zucchi <notzed ximian com> "Free Software, putting the Free back in Free Market." Novell's Evolution and Free Software Developer