On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 12:25 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: > I wasn't (am no longer) proposing to move "camel/" out of e-d-s. I was > proposing to put a configure.ac file in its directory. Moving Camel out > of evolution-data-server/ is not the scope nor point of this thread.
For what purpose? Camel depends on libedataserver. > > Calendar data isn't being stored by the addressbook server either. That > > isn't a great argument. > > And I question ... do all applications that want to use calendaring (and > only calendaring) have to depend on most of the Evolution components? > > Right now, if you translate that to Camel and E-mailing, it depends on > which distribution you have. On most Redhat based ones: yes. On Debian > based ones: no. Is there clarity? no. Is it making it more easy to > develop a pure "E-mail" application and to document which dependencies > you have (maybe even letting packagers share the same dependencies): no. > > The list of reasons (all valid ones, it's not because *you* mark them as > rant that it also *is* rant) goes on and on and on. So you've found a problem with the Red Hat packaging, in that it treats all of EDS a single library. File a bug with Red Hat, and notice that Debian, Maemo, and OpenEmbedded (at least) already have split EDS packages. In the scheme of things this is a very minor issue which effects very few people. I'd prefer to see effort spent on fixing bugs and memory leaks. Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolutionfirstname.lastname@example.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers