Hi Philip,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ext
Philip Van Hoof
[]
For you, attached and on a plate:
o. The patch for evolution-data-server
o. The patch for evolution-exchange
Trying to get this upstream is, for
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 18:32 +, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
Novell already has a bunch of LDTP stuff to test the Evo mailer from
the
user's viewpooint - run those tests on the patched version to see how
well they work. [Varadhan, those tests are already part of our QA
process, aren't
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 23:05 +, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
If Novell wants me to implement unit tests (or other tests) for this,
I
will ask for payment.
I am afraid that you won't get paid as Camel already has a
neat-test-suite and can be used/extended, IMO. ;-)
V. Varadhan
Novell, Inc.
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 18:32 +, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
1. Branch evolution-data-server into HEAD (development, with Philip's
patch), and the stable branch (without the patch).
I have created a branch exclusively for the camel mmap summary work,
viz., mmapped-camel-summary-branch
I'm going to attempt to conclude this mini-thread that got extended to
other mailing lists.
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 02:45 -0600, Veerapuram Varadhan wrote:
I have created a branch exclusively for the camel mmap summary work,
viz., mmapped-camel-summary-branch which will help Phillip to continue
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 09:53 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 01:10 -0600, Veerapuram Varadhan wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 23:05 +, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
If Novell wants me to implement unit tests (or other tests) for this,
I will ask for payment.
I am
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 17:40 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
... On the other hand, Philip, next time we meet in person I'll happily
buy you dinner :)
oh ... what about Boston? :)
I'll check with my daytime employer whether it's okay if I can visit the
Summit.
I don't know for sure
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 08:57 +, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
The lovely smell of programming environment flame wars!
Part one
As the developer of an application that has an extremely high focus on
reduced memory consumption and as the author of a patch for Camel that
reduced Evolutions
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 18:29 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
I'm waiting for the decision (yours) of making this optional using a
compilation flag or at run-time.
Let's do this in the usual manner:
0. Polish the patch in the usual way: make sure it follows the
indentation and naming conventions
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 13:26 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 18:29 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
I agree with 1,2,..3 and 4. I will make sure 1 will be finished soon.
Probably this evening with a compile-time option (--enable-mmap)
I'm waiting for the decision
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 14:46 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
I have to wonder if it's even worth ever merging the mmap hack into
Evolution at all. If the plan is to finish Zucchi's disk-summary branch,
which also solves the memory problems (afaik) as well as:
1. introducing an API for using
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 14:46 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
I have to wonder if it's even worth ever merging the mmap hack into
Evolution at all. If the plan is to finish Zucchi's disk-summary branch,
which also solves the memory problems (afaik) as well as:
1. introducing an API for using
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 16:05 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 14:46 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
I've been talking to Philip on IRC, and gave him these requirements for
his patch:
1. Don't change the external ABI of Camel, so that Evo needs no changes,
*OR*
13 matches
Mail list logo
