Re: [Evolution] Future of Evolution

On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 19:49 +0200, Job 317 wrote:
Again, I am unsure of your source of agitation. I am making comparrisons
between e-mail clients and it is a useful feature that come clients have
chosen to implement. I like Evolution a lot. Actually, it is my favorite
client for Linux and my desire is to see it blow everyone else away with
its features.

I might even be persuaded to assist in the development of the requested
features. I simply wasn't sure whether the features were currently being
developed. This was the original nature of my post -- whether these
features are being planned or not.

In 2004, the vast majority of bounce messages are *not* sent to the
spammers who sent the message in the 1st place.  Thus, you are making
the situation *worse* by bouncing spam.

Thus, the Evo developers think "Bounce Mail" is a mal-feature, and
won't put it in.

Regarding in-line PGP, the developers are tired of answering the
same question that has been asked twice a week since forever.

On 21-May-2004 19:31:08 +0200, you wrote:
oh, and just because "kmail has it" doesn't make it a good idea. in
fact, it is probably a good reason NOT to have it (I think a lot of
kmail features are crack).


On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 13:28 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 19:08 +0200, Job 317 wrote:
On 21-May-2004 17:57:20 +0200, you wrote:
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 16:52, Job 317 wrote:
Where can I find information about future releases and
for Evolution?

Specifically, I am interested in knowing when the next major
Evolution is due.

2.0: Q3


Third, I would like a Bounce option for SPAM. Is this
available? If
will it be?

Why would you want to bounce SPAM?

Admitedly, a lot of SPAMers these days don't care whether the
target is
active or not and don't check. They will likely spoof the source
anyway. However, it is a nice feature to make the spammer think
your e-mail address does not exist. Also, other mail clients
KMail) do currently support this feature.

this is a totally wasteful feature to have. it does nothing but
more bandwidth and create even more amounts of spam. What if the
original spammer spoofs someone's email address and you hit bounce?
well, now *that* user gets hit with extra spam... creating a world
even more pain and suffering. Besides, do you *really* think they
attention to what addresses bounce? hell no, it's not economical to

it's better to just leave the spam be and get on with your life.
contribute to the problem.

Any comment on the PGP-inline feature that I mentioned in my

have you coded it yet?


Jeffrey Stedfast
Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc.
fejj ximian com  -

Ron Johnson <ron l johnson cox net>

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