On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Patrick Ohly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 13:59 +0530, chenthill palanisamy wrote: > > > I don't get this part. Can you elaborate what you mean? Are you saying > > > that storing a VTIMEZONE with TZID=FOO as TZID=FOO 2 when it conflicts > > > with an existing VTIMEZONE should be avoided? > > yes, if libical is modified to return VTIMEZONE with the history and > > once mapping between "foreign" timezones to system timezones is done at > > the backend, this is would not be required. All the older events would > > be properly displayed. > > You assume that the mapping works in all cases. I don't think this is > realistic. There will always be a program FOO somewhere, somewhen using > a TZID=BAR which is unknown to Evolution and thus cannot be mapped. Even > getting this right just for Outlook alone will be challenging and > require permanent maintenance.
Very true.. it was/is a serious PITA while I was figuring out the details for the MAPI provider. On the brighter side, Exchange/Outlook 2007 has got this sorted out to an extent. They now store the historical rules in the timezone blob. See . (The MAPI provider does not yet makes use of these rules, it only identifies the timezone - maps it to one of the system timezones - then uses the system timezone information to generate the start-end times of the event.. its a todo on my list to make use of the stored information :-) ) And, like you have mentioned, the mapping needs constant maintenance despite publications like  or  :-( -Suman  http://blogs.msdn.com/stephen_griffin/archive/2006/12/06/outlook-2007-timezone-structures.aspx  http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms912053.aspx  http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsVista/en/library/31f49a21-cfed-4b63-b420-58a9eabbb04e1033.mspx?mfr=true _______________________________________________ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolutionfirstname.lastname@example.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers