Re: [Evolution] Multiple instances of evolution

[JP Rosevear <jpr novell com>]

On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 08:53 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 14:02 -0700, JP Rosevear wrote: 
> > On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 09:32 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 17:19 -0700, JP Rosevear wrote: 
> > > > On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 10:34 +0800, Not Zed wrote:
> > > > > I don't see how any such patch could possibly work very well, so i
> > > > > wouldn't get too excited about it.
> > > >
> > > > Why not?  As noted the main thing is the two separate camel sessions.
> > >
> > > Yes, two separate camel sessions.  Thats certainly a show-stopper for
> > > this 'working very well', don't you think?
> >
> > Umm, yes, and thats a) why its not in and b) what I originally stated
> > several messages ago.  I thought you were implying there was some
> > additional major issue that I had not already covered.
>
> Well i dont think that was made very clear, i.e. that not sharing the
> camel session is a critical shortcomming.
>
> I didn't want the sun engineers or redhat engineers getting all excited
> and trying install the patch, when it wouldn't work too well!  Thats
> all!

Understood.  Is it feasible to look at sharing the camel session in 2.4
or is this best left a dead issue for now?

-JP
-- 
JP Rosevear <jpr novell com>
Novell, Inc.