Send evolution-list mailing list submissions to
evolution-list gnome org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
evolution-list-request gnome org
You can reach the person managing the list at
evolution-list-owner gnome org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of evolution-list digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: evo 2.30.1.2 tasks have mind of their own (George H)
2. Re: Thoughts on one process-per window + state recovery on
crash? (Matthew Barnes)
3. Re: Slow decryption of encrypted emails (Milan Crha)
4. Re: Evolution-Mail handicaps ! (Adam Tauno Williams)
5. Re: evo 2.30.1.2 tasks have mind of their own (Milan Crha)
6. Re: mail client application (Patrick O'Callaghan)
7. Re: (no subject) (Patrick O'Callaghan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:41:41 +0300
From: George H <george dma gmail com>
To: evolution-list gnome org
Subject: Re: [Evolution] evo 2.30.1.2 tasks have mind of their own
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinj_oMWidCg_QQL48cxmxYccu2X4KFBkHl4QKUs mail gmail com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Milan Crha <mcrha redhat com> wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 10:51 +0300, George H wrote:
I am using the Exchange MAPI plugin, my calendar is not connected to
free/busy publishing site but it does get synchronized from the
exchange server that we are using.
Is there any other information or tests that I can provide / conduct
to help debug this problem.
? ? ? ?Hi,
unfortunately not. Microsoft Exchange server doesn't support time set on
Tasks, it can hold only dates (try setup a task in Outlook). There is
nothing evolution-mapi can do with it, because even we would find some
workaround, then for interoperability reasons it would be "for nothing",
because other clients wouldn't understand our workaround.
See [1] for more tech information.
? ? ? ?Bye,
? ? ? ?Milan
[1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc815922.aspx
Ah ok, thanks for sharing that. So this is a specific MAPI issue I
take it. If I was using a different connector then I guess I would not
have this same problem.
Well I guess I will no longer set tasks that are 1 day long unless
they span more than 24 hours.
Thanks for the help.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:24:09 -0400
From: Matthew Barnes <mbarnes redhat com>
To: evolution-list gnome org
Subject: Re: [Evolution] Thoughts on one process-per window + state
recovery on crash?
Message-ID: <1277205849 5209 33 camel localhost localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 15:58 +1000, Nick Jenkins wrote:
So I guess I really have two questions:
1) State recovery: Would it make sense to have Evo restore all open
windows on reopening after a crash, in the same way that (say) Firefox
restores all open tabs?
That's actually near the top of my to-do list. Right now all we do is
save the most recently used view (mail, calendar, etc.) to a single
GConf key. Obviously that breaks down if you're using more than one
window.
Proper session saving involves maintaining a key file, similar to a
Windows .ini file, containing a group per open window, and each group
holds enough state information about a window to reasonably restore it
on the next session.
This would also let you shut down your computer with Evolution still
running, and Evolution would appear as you left it when you log back in.
2) Crash impact reduction via process isolation: Would it make sense to
have a separate process for each window, such that a crash inside one
window takes down just that one window, whilst leaving the rest of the
app intact?
Evolution actually did work much like that in the early, early days.
See the "Why We Need It" section of a status report I wrote last year
about our Bonobo removal: http://mbarnes.livejournal.com/2606.html
Implementing a large, complex, tightly-integrated, multi-purpose
application is enough of a PITA when everything is in one process.
Trying to implement that kind of tight integration via inter-process
communication is just unwieldy. I believe that's what was found the
first time around, and I'm not all that anxious to return to that model.
I think the reason Chrome can get away with it is because in a web
browser, each tab or each window is more or less autonomous. You don't
have the tight integration of a PIM application between Chrome's tabs
and windows -- other than perhaps user preferences -- so a multi-process
model makes a lot more sense there.
For us, I think splitting remote storage management and local caching
off from the graphical front-end as we do for contact and calendar data
is still the most sensible approach and I'd like to see that applied to
email some day. Reducing Evolution to a graphical front-end that just
talks to D-Bus services and doesn't do any storage management itself I
think would go a long way towards the crash reducing process isolation
you're after.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:44:12 +0200
From: Milan Crha <mcrha redhat com>
To: evolution-list gnome org
Subject: Re: [Evolution] Slow decryption of encrypted emails
Message-ID: <1277207052 2654 15 camel madtux>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 09:06 +0000, mtbhooger-general yahoo co uk wrote:
What can I do to make Evolution use the performance that is available?
Hi,
it was a bug in evolution-data-server, which is fixed in 2.30.x, if I
recall correctly.
Bye,
Milan
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:46:40 -0400
From: Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org>
To: evolution-list gnome org
Subject: Re: [Evolution] Evolution-Mail handicaps !
Message-ID: <1277207200 7694 0 camel linux-yu4c site>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 01:04 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 01:45 +0200, bogomiel freenet de wrote:
Dear Developers,
This is not a developers list, it's a users list.
too many not understandable Password-Windows appear, prevent and
defeat the use under UBUNTU-OS v.9.04.
What is all this about ?
e.g.: Keyring-Password ? ; SMTP-Password ? ; Key-Password ? ;
Authentifikation-Password ?
Why not let the USER deside wether to use a Password or not.
Do you think Evolution is responsible for you having to choose all these
passwords? How about Ubuntu itself? Or your mail server? I only see a
single password box and if I used Gnome rather than KDE I wouldn't even
see that.
I use GNOME & Evolution. I don't see myriad password dialogs.
Perhaps Ubuntu, or your installation, has broken keyring support.
--
Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org> LPIC-1, Novell CLA
<http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com>
OpenGroupware, Cyrus IMAPd, Postfix, OpenLDAP, Samba
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:50:47 +0200
From: Milan Crha <mcrha redhat com>
To: evolution-list gnome org
Subject: Re: [Evolution] evo 2.30.1.2 tasks have mind of their own
Message-ID: <1277207447 2654 17 camel madtux>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 13:41 +0300, George H wrote:
If I was using a different connector then I guess I would not
have this same problem.
Hi,
nope, it's a *server* issue, not a client issue. That's how I understand
the MSDN doc, at least.
Bye,
Milan
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:26:20 -0430
From: Patrick O'Callaghan <poc usb ve>
To: evolution-list gnome org
Subject: Re: [Evolution] mail client application
Message-ID: <1277207780 4265 11 camel bree homelinux com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 11:36 +0200, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:
Was that intentional? If so, it's really, really, bad netiquette.
Was what intentional? It's also good netiquette to make your complaint
understandable.
poc
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 07:27:52 -0430
From: Patrick O'Callaghan <poc usb ve>
To: evolution-list gnome org
Subject: Re: [Evolution] (no subject)
Message-ID: <1277207872 4265 13 camel bree homelinux com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Please don't hijack threads. If you want everyone to see your message,
send it again as a new post. Don't just reply to some unrelated message
(even if you change the Subject line it's still the same thread).
poc
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
End of evolution-list Digest, Vol 59, Issue 30
**********************************************
