Re: [Evolution-hackers] The recent camel-lite improvements

["Veerapuram Varadhan" <vvaradhan novell com>]

On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 11:36 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:

[snip...]
> The very simple reason is lack of interest. Whenever I posted a patch in
> the past, it took months before somebody even touched the status of the
> bug, commented on it or even took a look at it. This has nothing to do
> with time anymore, as far as I can see (weeks, okay. But months?)
> 
> Which is absolutely not my problem, nor should I condemn that or
> whatever nor am I trying to make a statement other than: well then, I'm
> also not going to loose *my* time with that.
> 
> I guess that sounds fair, or doesn't it?
> 
> (I have to note, though, that fejj very recently commented on some of
> the patches, for which I'm grateful and I have been taking into account
> his comments and will improve the stuff he mentioned soon).
> 
Fejj is a long time contributor to Evolution and he is no different from
any evolution developers and a nod from him would be a good validation
point for Mailer hackers to work with you and get your work upstream.

Of all those features/implementations that you have mentioned so far, I
could list 2 of them fit the interest of evolution - mmap (without
summary format changes - adding len is okay) and memory-optimization in
using "tokens" in camel-folder-summary.c. Rest of them are too focused
and don't provide abstractions to extend for a desktop application.

Also, I am still on the assumption that you are getting your mmap work
committed to the mmap-branch, which would be validated and taken during
the next development cycle and I am yet to see any updates on that.

> Although I *AM* actively going to help the person who will port this
> stuff to Evolution's Camel. By that I mean that I *will* make time for
> this person. A lot if necessary. Entire evenings of free time if I have
> to.
> 
> It's not so much about *time* itself, it's 100% about loosing it on
> something that wont be acted upon anyway. Nobody enjoys that, I
> certainly don't.
> 
We appreciate that and looking forward to get the good work merged soon.


V. Varadhan