Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

["IGnatius T Foobar" <ajc citadel org>]

> Since we do really want to remove the fork and pick up packages from
> upstream, I can change the apis in evolution related packages if a new
> set of apis with some suffix is provided from libical upstream.
>   
Many of you have probably already read this on the libical mailing list, 
but just in case:

I have applied Chenthill's memory management patches (only to the 
'libical' directory and to the examples -- still have to do the 
'libicalcap' and 'libicalss' directories) using function names ending in 
"_r".  For example, icalcomponent_as_ical_string() is now simply a 
wrapper around icalcomponent_as_ical_string_r() which places the new 
string buffer on the ring before returning it to the caller.  The 
functions whose names end in "_r" have had Chenthill's memory management 
patches applied to them.

Do we still need to add the HANDLE_LIBICAL_MEMORY hack to make the old 
function names act like the new ones?  Chenthill's most recent message 
(quoted above) seems to imply that the Evolution team is willing to move 
to the new function names.  Let me know.

  -- Art