2007/5/31, Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 23:20 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote:
> > 2007/5/31, Matthew Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > > > What version to start with? I'm on Debian GNU/Linux, which currently
> > >
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:22 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> That sounds as if no upgrade of other apps would be forced.
> Or did you mean the stuff the evolution and gtk+ depends on would all
> need to go to newer versions? That's probably a lot of stuff, but it's
> not so bad.
Hard to predict. You
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 17:18 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
[snip]
> > Single namespace. It's all INBOX.folder.subfolder.
> > The one wrinkle is that in some cases 'folder' exists in the namespace,
> > but is not an actual box or folder (whatever the right term is) on the
> > server: INBOX.folder.s
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 23:20 +0200, Øystein Gisnås wrote:
> 2007/5/31, Matthew Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > > What version to start with? I'm on Debian GNU/Linux, which currently has
> > > evo
> > > 2.6. I notice that's a bit dated (alt
2007/5/31, Matthew Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > What version to start with? I'm on Debian GNU/Linux, which currently has
> > evo
> > 2.6. I notice that's a bit dated (although I did see that a few months ago
> > some of the Debian packag
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 11:38 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:10 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > > Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am
> > > thinking of
> > > doing a bit more to see if
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 13:38 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 16:10 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > > What version to start with? I'm on Debian GNU/Linux, which currently has
> > > evo
> > > 2.6. I notice that's a bit da
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 16:10 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > What version to start with? I'm on Debian GNU/Linux, which currently has
> > evo
> > 2.6. I notice that's a bit dated (although I did see that a few months ago
> > some of the D
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> What version to start with? I'm on Debian GNU/Linux, which currently has evo
> 2.6. I notice that's a bit dated (although I did see that a few months ago
> some of the Debian packagers were interested in making a more recent
> version).
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 12:22 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 23:14 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > > [Ross] What version to start with?
> >
> > I would prefer, if you can try it with Evolution 2.10.2. It is the
> > most recent stable release.
> Is EVOLUTION_DATA_SERVER_1_10_2
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 23:14 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> > [Ross] What version to start with?
>
> I would prefer, if you can try it with Evolution 2.10.2. It is the
> most recent stable release.
Is EVOLUTION_DATA_SERVER_1_10_2 the corresponding tag to use for
evolution-data-server?
--
Ross
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:10 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking
> > of
> > doing a bit more to see if I can get it working OK for my situation. I
> > have
> > an I
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:10 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking
> > of
> > doing a bit more to see if I can get it working OK for my situation. I
> > have
> > an
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 23:14 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> > Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking
> > of
> > doing a bit more to see if I can get it working OK for my situation. I
> > have
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking
> of
> doing a bit more to see if I can get it working OK for my situation. I have
> an IMAP mailbox which is very large, both in terms of folders (over 100) and
Hi,
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 07:58 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking
> of
> doing a bit more to see if I can get it working OK for my situation. I have
> an IMAP mailbox which is very large, both in terms of folders (over 100)
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 15:00 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 11:19 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 08:59 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> > > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:36 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > > > I've seen that too, but the
Hi. I've been getting into the code of evolution recently, and am thinking of
doing a bit more to see if I can get it working OK for my situation. I have
an IMAP mailbox which is very large, both in terms of folders (over 100) and
messages (the largest folder has >300,000 messages; my INBOX ha
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 17:55 +0300, Ross Burton wrote:
> The need for a cast is part of the (IMHO wrong) design of libxml2, the
> policy is that the libxml2 API requires UTF-8 strings, so they typedef
> xmlChar to unsigned char*. Application writers are then meant to run
> all strings through UTF-8
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:32 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> Hi friends,
>
> It is with immense pleasure I announce that Christian Kellner joins
> Chenthill as Calendar Maintainer. He is popularly known as "gicmo" on
> IRC. Gicmo is already the maintainer of gnome-vfs. He is the author and
> the
Hi friends,
It is with immense pleasure I announce that Christian Kellner joins
Chenthill as Calendar Maintainer. He is popularly known as "gicmo" on
IRC. Gicmo is already the maintainer of gnome-vfs. He is the author and
the maintainer of evolution-scalix and the CalDAV provider for
Evolution.
W
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 11:19 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 08:59 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:36 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > > I've seen that too, but the point was more: "Why are the message view
> > > headers looking dif
Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 08:59 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:36 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > I've seen that too, but the point was more: "Why are the message view
> > headers looking different than every other ETable I can see in
> > evolution ?". I've looke
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:36 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 07:19 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> > On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 00:17 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:>
> > > First thing that hit me was that it didn't use GtkTreeView and that it
> > > doesn't understa
Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 08:38 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:24 +0200, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> > Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 07:19 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> >
> > > > Last point is, why is the mail view headers fixed (like not look like
> > > > buttons) in 2.10
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 10:24 +0200, Frederic Crozat wrote:
> Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 07:19 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
>
> > > Last point is, why is the mail view headers fixed (like not look like
> > > buttons) in 2.10 and not the other views as well (memos, calendars,
> > > contacts)
> >
>
Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 07:19 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 00:17 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:>
> > First thing that hit me was that it didn't use GtkTreeView and that it
> > doesn't understand _ markup.
>
> I think that can be moved to GtkTreeView and shouldn'
Le jeudi 31 mai 2007 à 07:19 +, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> > Last point is, why is the mail view headers fixed (like not look like
> > buttons) in 2.10 and not the other views as well (memos, calendars,
> > contacts)
>
> In few themes, Ive seen that it looks like a table header, but not in
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 00:17 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> big title, but probably not a big deal (at least for the case I'm
> exposing)
>
> After reading [1] and [2] and part of the HIG, I started to see lots of
> bad dialogs in evolution. I've already tried to fix some of th
29 matches
Mail list logo
