On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 12:22 +0200, Christian Hilberg wrote: > Now, I would like to know how we should deal with the issue. We (the > evolution-kolab developers) could patch the 2.30 version of IMAPX only to get > things running. In this case, would our additions be pulled upstream? > As an alternative, would anyone like to implement RFC5464 in the current > upstream IMAPX so we could try and backport the changes into 2.30?
I would strongly recommend that you do it in the development branch first, then we can backport it to gnome-2-30. I've been backporting most IMAPX changes from master to the 2.30 branch; I see no particular reason why we shouldn't backport METADATA support too, as long as you're careful not to add new user-visible strings that would need translation. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre david.woodho...@intel.com Intel Corporation _______________________________________________ evolution-hackers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers