Re: [Evolution] Re: [Evolution-hackers] Questions about evolutionfuture plan

On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 14:10 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:

> For example, I posted a patch which speeds up the display of the "Unread
> Mail" folder by _several orders of magnitude_, but it won't be merged
> anytime soon because it disables hiding of junk messages (which IMHO was
> so inefficiently implemented that it should never have been allowed in,
> but now that we have the "feature" we can't just rip it out, even for a
> 100x speedup in displaying the message list).  See the "Performance with
> Exchange 2003" thread, among others.

Then why don't you replace the "feature" with a better implementation
and add it to that patch of yours?

> I get the impression that none of the Evolution developers have even
> tried my patch, no one around here seems to care about performance.  If
> I could get one other user to confirm the massive speedup, maybe someone
> would notice.

Note that Evolution only recently reopened it's HEAD branch. And that
very recently the role of maintainer has switched to Harish. Please give
him a chance. Perhaps he just forgot about the patch or overlooked it?

Perhaps are performance issues less the focus-of-development at this

I wouldn't say that a patch that didn't get approval is (always) because
of political reasoning.

Philip Van Hoof, Software Developer @ Cronos
home: me at pvanhoof dot be
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org
work: philip dot vanhoof at cronos dot be
junk: philip dot vanhoof at gmail dot com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]