I'm preserving the exchange for context; my responses are sprinkled
below.
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 23:47 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 15:55 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 20:22 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
Second question: even if it creates a
On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 09:46 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
Speaking of complexity, evolution/camel (and maybe Gnome?) do a kind
of
objects with C. Why not just use C++? Was the C++ toolchain too
unreliable at the start, or was there some other reason?
I didn't mean to exclude other alternatives.
On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 09:46 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
I'm preserving the exchange for context; my responses are sprinkled
below.
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 23:47 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 15:55 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 20:22 -0400, Jeffrey
On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 14:39 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
So it sounds as if Camel could (in principle) respond to a move
request
by issuing the appropriate IMAP command and then, starting a
thread to
do the other activities (indexing the target folder and deleting
the the
On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 11:39 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 08:14 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
server says:
* 1 EXPUNGE
camel-imap-summary does:
g_ptr_array_remove_index (messages, seqid - 1);
In imap_rescan, for example in case a message got removed by
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 20:22 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
[Ross wrote]
Second question: even if it creates a folder, does it need to stick
around for the folder creation to finish? I think I remember seeing
that camel was single-threaded
not true...
, relying on the client app to
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 20:45 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 18:34 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
The imap4 project is making things look better, though all in all it's
still much of the same (blocking and waiting for results, in stead of
letting the server do most the
On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 13:00 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
What I disliked most about Camel's 'imap' code, though, is the fact that
the sequences have to correspond to the array indexes of the
CamelFolderSummary. It sounds like it would have been more easy if that
was a key in a hashtable.
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
The best way is to ask for the ENVELOPE and the remaining info using the
normal BODY.PEEK method.
Have you actually ever tested this theory? or did you just pull this out
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 14:39 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
The best way is to ask for the ENVELOPE and the remaining info using the
normal BODY.PEEK method.
Have
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 09:48 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
I think the laptop problem is solved with the basic headers feature,
at least as far as collecting new summary info is concerned.
Syncing flags is another story, and where the real
slowness/user-frustration lies.
I'm sure David
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
it's not possible to do better w/o dropping features like message
threading.
In fact, the above minimalizing of header fetching already breaks the
quick context-menu vfolder
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 17:11 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
it's not possible to do better w/o dropping features like message
threading.
In fact, the above minimalizing
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 15:13 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 17:11 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:25 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
it's not possible to do better w/o dropping features like
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 18:27 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 15:13 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 17:11 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
.
All good points. I should explain I'm thinking of a mode
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 16:02 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 18:27 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 15:13 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 17:11 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 12:23 -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
.
On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 20:22 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
Why does it need to create a CamelFolder for the destination at all,
assuming I keep the focus on the source folder?
because you need both a source and a destination folder to move the
message(s) to?
kinda hard to move messages
Le jeudi 07 juin 2007 à 01:53 +0300, Philip Van Hoof a écrit :
Without immediately writing to disk work, the download by itself will
consume around 120 MB of RAM, and will most likely fail due to network
timeouts and other such problems (it'll take a while, since Evolution
fetches a ridiculous
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 08:25 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
Le jeudi 07 juin 2007 à 01:53 +0300, Philip Van Hoof a écrit :
Without immediately writing to disk work, the download by itself will
consume around 120 MB of RAM, and will most likely fail due to network
timeouts and other such
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 08:25 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
Le jeudi 07 juin 2007 à 01:53 +0300, Philip Van Hoof a écrit :
Without immediately writing to disk work, the download by itself will
consume around 120 MB of RAM, and
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 03:05 -0600, Sankar P wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
It improves the situation by setting your url-string to have the
basic_headers option. In the imap code of Camel, it will then ask for
less headers (but still way too much).
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 12:28 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 03:05 -0600, Sankar P wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
It improves the situation by setting your url-string to have the
basic_headers option. In the imap code of Camel, it
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 04:56 -0600, Sankar P wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 12:28 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 03:05 -0600, Sankar P wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
It improves the situation by setting your url-string to have
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 10:56 +0300, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 08:25 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
Le jeudi 07 juin 2007 à 01:53 +0300, Philip Van Hoof a écrit :
Without immediately writing to disk work, the download by itself will
consume around 120 MB of RAM, and
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 IMAP
On Thursday 31 May 2007 16:09, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
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
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) and
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
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
an
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 IMAP
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 IMAP
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 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 the
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 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 dated
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 I can get
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 packagers were
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 (although I did
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 can
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
has evo
40 matches
Mail list logo
