Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introspection enablement for libecal - huge changes needed?

2014-05-20 Thread Matthew Barnes
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 11:07 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: Aren't you going to run into the same problem with a GObject-based proxies for these libical objects? The proxies are reference-counted, the libical objects are not, so they may go away before their proxies do. This would leave the proxy

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Introspection enablement for libecal - huge changes needed?

2014-05-20 Thread Milan Crha
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 11:07 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: Aren't you going to run into the same problem with a GObject-based proxies for these libical objects? The proxies are reference-counted, the libical objects are not, so they may go away before their proxies do. This would leave the proxy

Re: [Evolution-hackers] WebKit based Evolution composer status and future

2014-05-20 Thread Milan Crha
On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 16:34 +0400, Emre Erenoglu wrote: ping... Hi, do not be afraid, it is not forgotten, there was only involved some other work which interrupted the webkit-composer work. It's mostly over now and the expected development version with the webkit composer branch merged

Re: [Evolution-hackers] WebKit based Evolution composer status and future

2014-05-20 Thread Emre Erenoglu
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Milan Crha mc...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 16:34 +0400, Emre Erenoglu wrote: ping... Hi, do not be afraid, it is not forgotten, there was only involved some other work which interrupted the webkit-composer work. It's mostly over now