On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 18:43 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 12:12 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > Perhaps the "reply to all" nag could have a configurable threshold, but > > it's no big deal. > > Yeah, I thought about that too, but couldn't be bothered. It's only a > prompt to make you think; it doesn't have to be precise. > > Besides, the kind of person who would tweak it is the kind of person who > doesn't need to be reminded because they're perfectly capable of just > pressing the right button in the first place. Although I suppose there's > some merit in having a hidden gconf key which a sysadmin could set for > everyone... > > > Otherwise, I'm in agreement. I'm not sure how we proceed from here (if > > there are no objections). Does Matthew now take over? > > There is no 'proceed'. It's done, tested, and pushed to the git tree. > There's nothing for Matthew to do¹. > > http://git.gnome.org/browse/evolution/log/
OK, I look forward to complaining about it once it hits the distros :-) poc _______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list [email protected] To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
