Re: [evolution-patches] seeking patch review for bug #41846

[Calvin Liu <calvin liu sun com>]

Not Zed, Jeff,

Just FYI.

I tested it on my linux box. Seems it works for me, no outstanding
side-effect.

Calvin

On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 11:14, Not Zed wrote:
> I dunno jeff, it seems to be on the right track - at least for a
> solution which will work for most of the time.  So long as it checks for
> the user  cancelled exception, which is the only really important (and
> configured) one, it could just go onto the next message otherwise.
> 
> It probably also needs to do the same as the pop fetching code, if you
> get a user cancel, clear the cancellation and still do a folder sync (so
> it doesn't try to re-send messages).
> 
> On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 11:26 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> 
> > This isn't the right fix. What if the exception was the the user
> > cancelled? or that the server was unreachable? or...?
> > 
> > I don't think you should bother trying to fix this bug right now. The
> > proper fix will require a fair amount of work I believe (making sure
> > all the underlying code sets the proper exceptions, keeping track of
> > which exceptions we've gotten, etc).
> > 
> > I suggest you move on to another bug and leave this one up to me or
> > Zucchi.
> > 
> > Jeff
> > 
> > On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 18:45 +0800, Calvin Liu wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Hi, there,
> > > 
> > > Here's a patch for bug #41846/55290.
> > > This bugs shows the outbox queue could be blocked when error occurs.
> > > 
> > > Patch is simple, just change "break" to "continue" in a for loop.
> > > Seems work for me.
> > > 
> > > Please review it. I'm wondering if there's any side-effect.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > > Calvin
>