Re: [Evolution] evolution-list Digest, Vol 116, Issue 8

The maxim "not fixing what isn't broken", or "it it works don't mess
with it" is insufficient to inform open source design, implementation
and packaging decisions.  Linux is a uniquely dynamic thing, the end
user experience resulting from the graceful, or not, integration of
capabilities provided by dozens of independent development efforts. The
decisions made in this integration, which are made to address the needs
of a user-base, as well as the ideals of the integrator results in an
ever growing tree of Linux distributions, spins, and branches.

It is very often the case that for various Distributions, a given
package will be built with different options depending on what
capabilities the packagers deem both important and stable enough to
offer their users. This is also true with the packages themselves.  A
development team may target their development efforts at specific sorts
of applications, with other applications deprecated and not well
supported, and less so in the future. It is certain that change will
happen as other developers, then packagers, respond to all manner of
changes beyond their spheres of influence.  

Sometimes this change will be inconvenient to end users. It may be
possible for an end user to improve their situation by researching the
cause of problems they encounter, bringing their findings to the
attention of the developers, relaying developer comments to their
distribution packagers. (in the case of Ubuntu, which is downstream of
Debian, maybe it's necessary to contact Debian packagers)
Then in time and with good fortune a is incorporated into their package.
Another possibility is that another user has already resolved this issue
and built a package included in some public package repository. For the
end user: Building, installing and testing a package sufficiently that
it can be used in production may be a significant undertaking, and for
all but the most experienced, best done without using live email
accounts as the test data set. If it is not practical to introduce a
patched into the end user's package, another option would be to install
a minimal VM with some Linux release that performs as desired for the
subject package.

Change is ongoing and inevitable.  This essay intends entertain, comfort
and inform those who have occasion to regret certain manifestations of

Best Regards, Dennis Reichel

On Sat, 2015-03-07 at 13:44 +0000, juggle ekit com wrote:
I use Ubuntu as a tool, just like I used to use Win XP.  I've never
got involved with compiling my own "apps" on Ubuntu.  I know that in
theory this is straightforward but I would prefer to avoid having to
do so, which is why I'm running an LTS edition.  I'm old enough to
realise that, without taking the time to find out exactly what I'm
doing, this would probably be a good way to trash my system.  

There are other odd things going on with Evolution that I don't
understand.  I tried deselecting Standard Plugins and the "Bayesian
Spam Filter" options in Ubuntu Software Centre.  The mouse pointer
turns to a timer while the "changes are applied", but Edit/Plugins
from the Evolution menu shows nothing has changed.  Making these
changes and re-starting my system makes no difference either: the
option boxes I cleared appear checked again in Ubuntu Software Centre,
so something's  not right.

I am at a loss to understand why Evolution - which has worked pretty
much perfectly ever since I moved over to Ubuntu nearly a decade ago -
should suddenly start falling over.  Has the age-old engineering maxim
"if it works, don't mess with it" has been disregarded?

eKit - the global phonecard with more!

Spend less on overseas calls, receive messages worldwide.
Visit for details.

evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list gnome org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...


Best Regards, Dennis Reichel (dennis * reichel d.t net)

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