Re: [Evolution] Evolution release and major regressions, a longtime user's thoughts

[Art Alexion <art rhd org>]

While I am as frustrated as you with some of the bugs and regressions
that you mention, I don't think it is constructive, or even in your self
interest, to take such a scolding and tattling tone with people, many of
whom volunteer, to provide you with software for free.



On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 11:48 -0400, Andrew Montalenti wrote:
> I recently upgraded from Ubuntu Hardy to Ubuntu Intrepid.  Most of my
> GNOME software worked well upon upgrade, there were even some
> improvements.  However, a major piece of GNOME software that I use
> every
> single day and that is important to both my personal life and business
> stopped functioning correctly: Evolution.
>
> It's clear to me that from 2.22 -> 2.24.3, Evolution redesigned its
> backend data store and unleashed this onto users as a "stable release"
> with disastrous effects. If you look around this list, you'll find
> lots
> of discontent.  Basic things that existed in Evolution 2.22 -- basic
> features -- no longer work.  For example:
>
> * Search folders or searches including "unread message" status does
> not
> work (regression)
>
> * Declaring a search folder of a search folder (vfolder of a vfolder)
> no
> longer works (regression).  For me and many others on the list, this
> essentially meant that all of our vfolders stopped working altogether,
> meaning that we had to reorganize our mail in a different way.
> (regression)
>
> * Unread message counts are incorrect vis-a-vis the reality.  For
> example, every time I send a message, my inbox's unread message count
> goes up by 1.  This despite the fact that there are no unread messages
> there.  Others report even larger divergences. (regression)
>
> * The "Unmatched" VFolder no longer exists.  (regression)
>
> It turns out that these fixes still have no been committed even in Evo
> 2.26, released in March.  Brian J. Murrell has been rightfully
> indignant about this.  He has been living with these regressions for
> months.
>
> I consider Evolution to be one of the core pieces of software that
> GNOME offers, and one that the GNOME release team should carefully
> watch when declaring new "stable" releases of GNOME.  I think that you
> guys have done the GNOME community a major disservice by releasing
> 2.24/2.26 as "stable" GNOME software.
>
> I think the fact that Evo was allowed to be released at this new
> version with so many regressions is really a sad state of affairs, and
> suggests that GNOME needs to reconsider its release process.  I'm
> going
> to be contacting the GNOME release team about this.
>
> Evo worked fine at 2.22, and I see very few improvements between 2.22
> and 2.24, only regressions.  That suggests that someone on the Evo
> team
> thought it was a good idea to "redesign the internals" without really
> committing to what that entailed -- releasing the redesigned version
> to
> a small "beta" community before declaring it to be the "stable
> version"
> released to thousands of production users and including in all major
> distributions as the latest and greatest stable software from GNOME.
>
> As a software engineer myself, I would never do unto my users what the
> evo developers have done unto theirs.  Do you understand that even a
> *single regression* can cause users to stop using your software?
>
> I don't know what can be done about it now, but this reflects very
> badly on Evolution and GNOME for me.  I'm a long-time GNOME user (~ 10
> years), and in recent years as my computer has become more and more
> integral to my livelihood, as a small business owner and software
> engineer.  I have become more and more hesitant about upgrading to the
> latest GNOME versions.  That's why I was still running Ubuntu Hardy as
> of a week ago.  At least it worked.  I upgraded to Intrepid only
> because Jaunty is right around the corner, and I figured this would at
> least represent a "stable" snapshot of software.  I guess I was wrong.
>
> What does it say when some of GNOME's most committed users (users who
> have hacking credentials -- I know C, GTK+, and GObject!) are hesitant
> to upgrade to your latest stable releases?  Even worse, what does it
> say when their hesitancy is justified?
>
> I really want the best for GNOME and Evolution and want to see this
> situation improve.  I don't know what can be done about it now from
> the
> Evolution side, but at the very least, a "mea culpa" from the core
> developers would be a good start.  For those of us in the community
> (like myself) that have some hacking credentials and could help fix
> the
> mess you created, some pointers for *how* to help you guys out would
> be
> a good second step.
>
> Andrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> Evolution-list mailing list
> Evolution-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

-- 
Art Alexion
Resources for Human Development, Inc.          215-951-0300 x3075
4700 Wissahickon Ave.                                 art rhd org
Philadelphia, PA 19144                               267-615-3172