Hi everyone,

On Thursday 07 July 2011, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 23:33 +0200, Christian Hilberg wrote: 
> > The first step could be to create an evolution-kolab git repository at 
> > gnome.org, at least this is what came to my mind instantly. In order to get 
> > the prerequisites right, I have applied for a GNOME account with git 
> > access. 
> > This has been vouched for by the Evolution team (thanks, Matt), and I have 
> > received confirmation from the GNOME account management team today.
> > 
> > Since neither my kernel concepts evolution-kolab team mates nor myself have 
> > done upstream integration for an Evolution plugin yet, I would like to know 
> > how we should best proceed from here. If there is any reading we should 
> > have 
> > done prior to further acting, we'll gladly accept pointers to the relevant 
> > documents. David (or anyone else involved there), I heard that you did the 
> > same with your EWS team recently, so if there are any lessons-learned which 
> > we 
> > should heed to, we will also be happy to know. Long story short, we will 
> > just 
> > be happy for any directing through this process so we can get through it 
> > smoothly.
> First of all, welcome to the family!  It's great to have more developers
> supporting new backends for Evolution.

Thanks for the welcome.

Reading through the available documentation and Matt's braindump, a few 
remained open, so I'll post them here (a) for my own education and (b) for the

> I agree that getting the code into git.gnome.org is the first step.
> Chen already pointed you in the right direction:
>         http://live.gnome.org/Git/NewRepository

...this leads to http://live.gnome.org/ProjectPrerequisites where a list of
prerequisites is presented. I think we do match all of these (see my follow-up
to Chen's mail).

  However, it states there, that "To satisfy these requirements, particularly
number 3, please send us any relevant URLs such as project homepage, list 
archives, ..."
-- who is "we" in the case of evolution-kolab? The Evolution team? GNOME people?
I'm not sure whom to contact for the paperwork. :)

From there, I took the hop to http://live.gnome.org/CopyrightAssignment and 
myself puzzled again. :) Of how much relevance are the details listed there for
an Evolution plugin? Our source is LGPL v2.1+, the user docs and stuff are CC 
... so, are any details of that copyright stuff applicable to us?

My traceback algorithm next pointed to
http://live.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/ModuleRequirements, where there is much 
"modules", and the following (among other things) was not instantly clear to me:
* Which will be the status for evolution-kolab? Will it be a "module" in
  the sense presented on the ModuleRequirements page?
* We do have UI strings (in EPlugin), but no translation as yet - how about 

From there, the hop was to http://live.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/ModuleProposing
and the following questions arose:
* does evolution-kolab as an Evo plugin need to go through the module proposal
* (from here, loop back to ModuleRequirements and the question whether
  evolution-kolab is a "module" in that sense, if you like... :-)
* is the email to the desktop-devel mailing list needed?
* (from here, loop back to ProjectPrerequisites and the question whom
  to contact for the paperwork in case of evolution-kolab, if you like... :-)
* 3.0 readiness: (void). We're 2.30(.3), porting to 3.x pending. How to
  deal with that?
* Build testing: no jhbuild as yet -- only relevant once a new release from
  within the GNOME git is planned for?
* "Judgement Criteria" ... can I deduce from what is listed there, that 
  is _not_ a module in the sense of ModuleRequirements? I frankly do not know
  what to make out of this stuff in evolution-kolab context... does this fall
  under the "don't care (yet)"-clauses?

> When you're ready to start accepting bug reports, you'll also want to
> get evolution-kolab added to bugzilla.gnome.org as a new project.  The
> steps for that are here:
> http://live.gnome.org/Bugsquad/ForMaintainers#To_add_a_project_to_the_bugzilla_database

Okay with that, should be fine. I guess I should mention the current
(i.e. SourceForge) website in the bug report requesting a tracker for
evolution-kolab? And is there a sensible way to migrate bugs from SF
to bugzilla, or will we need to start anew?

> Assuming evolution-kolab includes translatable strings, you'll want to
> make sure the project is properly set up for localization using gettext
> and intltool.  This is kind of a broad topic, but there's lots of
> documentation about that here:
>         http://live.gnome.org/TranslationProject/DevGuidelines

Hum. We're set up to use intltool/gettext, but no translation has taken place
as yet. Moreover, the release of gnome-2-30 has vanished into history, so I 
it will be okay to push master from SF-Git to GNOME-Git and start translation
preparations for a later (3.x) release there itself?

> Then when you're ready for the software to start receiving translations,
> file a bug asking for evolution-kolab to be added to "Damned Lies" (the
> translation hub for GNOME projects):
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=damned-lies&component=l10n.gnome.org

Again, I assume this will take place at a later point, porting to 3.x
coming first, then starting translation stuff?

> [Stuff in between seems fairly clear, will get back to that later on]
> I would also suggest once you've synchronized evolution-kolab's code
> with the latest E-D-S release, that you also synchronize its version
> number (major.minor at least, such as 3.2) so it's easy to keep them
> paired up properly.

I think I'd like to stick with the major.minor.patchlevel scheme, if
possible. Some guidance in choosing proper numbers here will be appreciated.
I'll probably to something like "0.30.3" for the gnome-2-30 branch back
at SourceForge, but a major "0" will not be a good choice for GNOME 3.x
it seems?
> I think this is enough to get you started.

Phew, that's quite some maze you have here. :)

> There's a lot to digest here

Not yet finished devouring...

> and a lot I'm probably taking for granted, but Chen and I are
> happy to try and clarify points or answer questions.

Thanks a lot. We'll be trying our best to comply. I guess a step-by-step
approach will be what I'll try, with some sort of a traceback algo for
error recovery. ;-)

Kind regards,


kernel concepts GbR        Tel: +49-271-771091-14
Sieghuetter Hauptweg 48
D-57072 Siegen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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

Reply via email to