Re: [Evolution-hackers] Retiring evolution-exchange

[Matthew Barnes <mbarnes redhat com>]

On Fri, 2012-06-01 at 15:19 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> Then why not retire evolution-mapi instead of evolution-exchange ?

I hadn't considered that.  I'll defer to Milan to make that call.

I thought evolution-mapi worked with Exchange 2003 servers at least in
theory; I don't know how much actual testing that's had.  And I know
Milan has been maintaining evo-mapi more actively than evo-exchange and
has a good working relationship with the OpenChange developers.

In any case, maintaining this many different backends for Exchange is
ridiculous and we need to drop at least one of them given our manpower
shortage.  I guess I don't care so much which, and am probably not the
most qualified to choose.

What do you think, Milan?


> I do understand that you looked at the code updates and available
> developers to decide. It would also be good if we choose what to support
> based on, what would work as a good enterprise solution. I say
> enterprise since we are here talking about exchange and groupwise.
> 
> W.r.t evolution-groupwise, it would be good to continue it until this
> release. I second the reason which Akhil has mentioned in another email.
> We would also need to give it sometime to see if there are people
> interested in contributing there.

The thing is, all of these modules are going to require significant work
to adapt to the branch I'm about to merge -- groupwise perhaps even more
than the rest -- and given that I don't even have access to a GroupWise
server to test the changes I'll have to make to it, I'm highly resistant
to bothering with it if it's not going to have a full-time maintainer
going forward.

If someone were to step forward as at least a short-term maintainer that
could help test the changes, I would reconsider.

I will, however, release an evolution-groupwise 3.5.2 with the changes
you made recently for it.  That's a fair request.

Matthew Barnes