[Evolution-hackers] IMAP shared folders support
Hi, I was wondering if imap shared folders support in evolution was planned. It was working at some point when choosing "imap IV" server protocol, but it seems removed in recent versions. Regards, Thomas Cataldo. ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] New version of the Evo SVN Makefile
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 18:42 -0400, Paul Smith wrote: > Hi all; > > I just uploaded a new version of my Makefile to build Evo from SVN. > This version allows for building the current SVN trunk HEAD (up until > today I was building on the 2.20 branch). Really excellent I must say. Thanks, jules > Thanks to Reid Thompson for pointing out that gnome-icon-theme is now > necessary for the build. I also added a package prerequisite on the > icon-naming-utils package, which is needed to build gnome-icon-theme. > > One potentially odd thing: gnome-icon-theme adds its pkgconfig info into > $prefix/share/pkgconfig instead of $prefix/lib/pkgconfig like all the > other packages; is this correct? Maybe because the icon-theme package > contains no architecture-specific content? > > > Anyway, if you want a simple way to build Evo from SVN without > rebuilding all of Gnome (as with GARNOME), give it a whirl! > > http://mad-scientist.us/evolution.html > ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] IMAP shared folders support
Hello Thomas, We don't have any planned work towards imap shared folder support for the next cycle. We would be happy to take, if any patches are submitted for this. I assume "imap IV" is same as "imap4rev1". This is deprecated during 2.8 cycle iirc. -Srini. On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 10:26 +0200, Thomas Cataldo wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering if imap shared folders support in evolution was planned. > It was working at some point when choosing "imap IV" server protocol, > but it seems removed in recent versions. > > Regards, > Thomas Cataldo. > > ___ > Evolution-hackers mailing list > Evolution-hackers@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
[Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
Hello everyone, There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be fine, if we just sync the minor versions. Evolution 2.22 GtkHTML 3.22 Evolution Data Server 1.22 Evolution Exchange 2.22 There won't be any change in the API/ABI/library version. Just the application version is being synchronized. This needs to be sorted out before the first dot release on the unstable cycle. Let me know, if you have any concerns or better suggestions. -Srini. ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:31 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > Hello everyone, > > There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of > Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be > fine, if we just sync the minor versions. > > Evolution 2.22 > GtkHTML 3.22 > Evolution Data Server 1.22 > Evolution Exchange 2.22 > > There won't be any change in the API/ABI/library version. Just the > application version is being synchronized. This needs to be sorted out > before the first dot release on the unstable cycle. Let me know, if you > have any concerns or better suggestions. Does it really matter? But, well, I doesn't care so please go ahead... -- jules ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:31 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of > Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be > fine, if we just sync the minor versions. > > Evolution 2.22 > GtkHTML 3.22 > Evolution Data Server 1.22 > Evolution Exchange 2.22 I'd like to see EDS synced completely to 2.22. Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.burtonini.com./ PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
Am Mittwoch, den 03.10.2007, 13:43 +0200 schrieb Jules Colding: > Does it really matter? But, well, I doesn't care so please go ahead... it does. it's annoying that i have to remember which version corresponds to which gnome release for gtk+, glib, evo&friends and other modules (i'm happy that atk, at-spi & gail already switched to the gnome versioning a few months back), both from a bugsquad and a release-team point of view. andre -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | failed http://www.iomc.de/ signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 14:17 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 03.10.2007, 13:43 +0200 schrieb Jules Colding: > > Does it really matter? But, well, I doesn't care so please go ahead... > > it does. it's annoying that i have to remember which version corresponds > to which gnome release for gtk+, glib, evo&friends and other modules > (i'm happy that atk, at-spi & gail already switched to the gnome > versioning a few months back), both from a bugsquad and a release-team > point of view. OK, I can see that you guys that are joggling with dozens of packages can benefit from this. I'm lucky as I simply doesn't care which evo version goes with which Gnome - I just make sure that e-b builds towards them all. Best regards, jules ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:31 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of > Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be > fine, if we just sync the minor versions. > > Evolution 2.22 > GtkHTML 3.22 > Evolution Data Server 1.22 > Evolution Exchange 2.22 +1 Since Evolution is an official GNOME component I think it makes a lot of sense to keep the versions sync'ed with the mothership. Matthew Barnes ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 14:17 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > it does. it's annoying that i have to remember which version > corresponds to which gnome release for gtk+, glib, evo&friends and > other modules (i'm happy that atk, at-spi & gail already switched to > the gnome versioning a few months back), both from a bugsquad and a > release-team point of view. For what little it's worth, I agree the versions should be synced. In addition to the above, it's much simpler to deal with SVN branch naming etc. when you only have one version number to worry about and it's the same across all the components. -- --- Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Find some GNU make tips at: http://www.gnu.org http://make.mad-scientist.us "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 09:03 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:31 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of > > Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be > > fine, if we just sync the minor versions. > > > > Evolution 2.22 > > GtkHTML 3.22 > > Evolution Data Server 1.22 > > Evolution Exchange 2.22 > > +1 > > Since Evolution is an official GNOME component I think it makes a lot of > sense to keep the versions sync'ed with the mothership. > +1 here too, assuming my vote counts. :) This will make it easier for us disto maintainers. Unfortunately, nothing can be done about gtkhtml, because it's major rev is already past 2. Daniel ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 12:53 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:31 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of > > Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be > > fine, if we just sync the minor versions. > > > > Evolution 2.22 > > GtkHTML 3.22 > > Evolution Data Server 1.22 > > Evolution Exchange 2.22 > > I'd like to see EDS synced completely to 2.22. And while we're at it, can we please drop the meaningless -1.2 suffix from the library names (e.g. libedataserver-1.2.so)? As far as I can tell this is just an artifact from an age before the EDS sonames were properly versioned. Applications that link to E-D-S would have to be recompiled obviously, but as long as they're using pkgconfig correctly they should not require any code changes (I think). Now is the perfect time to drop it if we're ever going to. Matthew Barnes ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 16:51 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > Applications that link to E-D-S would have to be recompiled obviously, > but as long as they're using pkgconfig correctly they should not require > any code changes (I think). I knew this claim would come back to bite me. The pkgconfig meta-data files in EDS have the -1.2 suffix in their names, so applications would have to alter their configure.ac and pkgconfig files slightly. But I think the rest of my argument still stands. Matthew Barnes ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
Matthew, On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 16:51 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 12:53 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:31 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > > There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of > > > Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be > > > fine, if we just sync the minor versions. > > > > > > Evolution 2.22 > > > GtkHTML 3.22 > > > Evolution Data Server 1.22 > > > Evolution Exchange 2.22 > > > > I'd like to see EDS synced completely to 2.22. > > And while we're at it, can we please drop the meaningless -1.2 suffix > from the library names (e.g. libedataserver-1.2.so)? As far as I can > tell this is just an artifact from an age before the EDS sonames were > properly versioned. > Isn't that -1.2 is the API version? > Applications that link to E-D-S would have to be recompiled obviously, > but as long as they're using pkgconfig correctly they should not require > any code changes (I think). > I don't think those application would be happy to do this. There are a few apps that use the .so directly without pkgconfig (iirc OpenOffice.org). Unless there is a clear nod from the stake holders of those projects, I wouldn't be favor of doing this. The old version of apps break with new Evolution/EDS. Lot of those apps don't have a 6 month and takes a lot to ship a update for the old version to cope up with new EDS. -Srini. ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Synching Evolution/GNOME version
Ross, Even I would have loved this if we can get all the friends to be 2.22. Unfortunately GtkHTML can't be 2.22 as it is already 3.xx. I felt that synchronizing the minor versions is fine. I'm not really against it, if there aren't any major objections to this. -Srini. On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 12:53 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:31 +, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > There have been many requests regarding syncing the versions of > > Evolution (currently 2.12) and GNOME (2.20). I feel that it would be > > fine, if we just sync the minor versions. > > > > Evolution 2.22 > > GtkHTML 3.22 > > Evolution Data Server 1.22 > > Evolution Exchange 2.22 > > I'd like to see EDS synced completely to 2.22. > > Ross ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution.Contact.Set(ContactField field, IntPtr value)
Hi Marcus, On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 10:03 +0200, Marcus Krantz wrote: > Hi all, > I'm playing around a little bit Evolution-sharp. Since .NET is all new > to me I have some problems setting fields of contact instances. I > would really like to use the Set function but when I try I get > compilation errors all the time. Consider the following snippet: > > Contact c = new Contact(); > ContactAddress addr = new ContactAddress(); IntPtr i = Marshal.AllocHGlobal(Marshal.SizeOf(addr)); > > addr.Country = "Sweden"; > addr.Street = "Test"; > addr.Code = "SE-123 23"; > addr.Region = "Gothenburg"; > > c.Set(ContactField.AddressWork, addr);// CS1503 > c.Set(ContactField.Email, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]");//CS1503 > Marshal.StructureToPtr (addr ,i, false); c.Set(ContactField.AddressWork, i); You need to free the allocated memory. This may help : http://www.mono-project.com/Interop_with_Native_Libraries Regards, Johnny ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
