Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-10-10 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
No worries, we're not on a strict release schedule. We can do point releases at any time if you find that something needs to be updated. Thanks for your continued involvement. We're really looking forward to the final outcome. -- Art Chenthill wrote: I was not able to try the upstream

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-10-06 Thread Chenthill
I was not able to try the upstream libical yet. I am right now packed with some other work, so I will try to get this done as soon as possible. Suddenly the weekends have gone out of my hands as I have to move out of station to places that do not have internet connectivity. Either me or suman

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-23 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
I have applied Chenthill's memory management patches (only to the 'libical' directory and to the examples -- still have to do the 'libicalcap' and 'libicalss' directories) using function names ending in _r. IMHO, HANDLE_LIBICAL_MEMORY can be removed. Ok folks, it's done ... The

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-19 Thread Chenthill
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 22:52 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote: I have applied Chenthill's memory management patches (only to the 'libical' directory and to the examples -- still have to do the 'libicalcap' and 'libicalss' directories) using function names ending in _r. IMHO,

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-17 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
Since we do really want to remove the fork and pick up packages from upstream, I can change the apis in evolution related packages if a new set of apis with some suffix is provided from libical upstream. Many of you have probably already read this on the libical mailing list, but just in

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-10 Thread Chenthill
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 18:00 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 09:12 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote: Chenthill wrote: So it is better to inform all the stake holders about the change and let them depend on the library versions to decide whether to free the memory or not

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-10 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
Chenthill wrote: So it is better to inform all the stake holders about the change and let them depend on the library versions to decide whether to free the memory or not if they have a need to depend on the older versions of libical. I think no one deny to make the necessary changes knowing that

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-09 Thread Chenthill
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 23:55 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote: Patrick Ohly wrote: In the upstream libical certain functions return char * pointers into memory stored in ring buffers. The caller must not free those pointers. The drawback is that the life time of those strings is not

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-09 Thread Patrick Ohly
On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 09:12 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote: Chenthill wrote: So it is better to inform all the stake holders about the change and let them depend on the library versions to decide whether to free the memory or not if they have a need to depend on the older versions of

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-08 Thread Chenthill
On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 11:02 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: Hello! http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeassociation/ has released 0.32 of libical on 2008-09-01. The KDE-PIM team has switched to that code for KDE 4.2. On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 21:49 +, JP Rosevear wrote: On Sun, 2007-05-20 at

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-08 Thread Chenthill
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 12:16 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote: Chenthill wrote: On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 11:02 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: Hello! http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeassociation/ has released 0.32 of libical on 2008-09-01. The KDE-PIM team has switched to that code

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-08 Thread Patrick Ohly
On Mon, 2008-09-08 at 12:16 -0400, IGnatius T Foobar wrote: In what way does it break the userspace API? Is it possible that the API could be extended in such a way that memory handling depends upon how it's called? Chenthill already provided the relevant links:

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-08 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
Chenthill wrote: On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 11:02 +0200, Patrick Ohly wrote: Hello! http://sourceforge.net/projects/freeassociation/ has released 0.32 of libical on 2008-09-01. The KDE-PIM team has switched to that code for KDE 4.2. On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 21:49 +, JP Rosevear

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2008-09-08 Thread IGnatius T Foobar
Patrick Ohly wrote: In the upstream libical certain functions return char * pointers into memory stored in ring buffers. The caller must not free those pointers. The drawback is that the life time of those strings is not predictable. In the current Evolution libical, those same functions (not

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2007-05-21 Thread Srinivasa Ragavan
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 21:49 +, JP Rosevear wrote: On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 15:03 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: Hi, I discovered last week that there is an attempt to resurrect libical from non-maintainership, merge all of the patches from various forks, and start making sane releases

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2007-05-20 Thread Matthew Barnes
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 15:03 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: I'll happily start working on extracting the changes to EDS and pushing them into the new libical repository, if the Evolution team as a whole agrees that the fork of libical will be dropped. +1 Matthew Barnes

Re: [Evolution-hackers] Removing libical fork, moving to new upstream?

2007-05-20 Thread JP Rosevear
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 15:03 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: Hi, I discovered last week that there is an attempt to resurrect libical from non-maintainership, merge all of the patches from various forks, and start making sane releases again[1]. Are the evolution team as whole interested in