On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 14:12 +0200, Alberto Mardegan wrote: > On 12/04/2013 02:03 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > > On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 13:13 +0200, Alberto Mardegan wrote: > >>> Enabling Ubuntu Online Accounts did not work immediately, because my > >>> compile platform (Quantal) was too old. Would it be worthwhile to invest > >>> more work into this? > >> > >> No, I think that the only sensible thing to do is add the required > >> package versions in the configure.ac bits (I wrote the needed versions > >> in the bug report), and do not bother supporting older releases; > >> otherwise the delta between UOA and gSSO would get much bigger. > > > > Let's rephrase ;-) Would it be useful for Ubuntu users to support a more > > recent Ubuntu distro, and if so, which one? > > I'm afraid I still don't get it :-)
There are Ubuntu users who download and install binaries from syncevolution.org, typically because these binaries are more recent than the version they get from their current distro. I see that as a service for users and a way to get testing in advance of inclusion in a distro. I can't compile SyncEvolution n times for different distros, that would be too much work. Instead I try to provide archives that work across a wide range of distros, usually by compiling on an old distro. But that limits what kind of features I can enable. It looks like enabling Ubuntu Online Accounts in these binaries will not be easy, so I'll probably not do it. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. _______________________________________________ SyncEvolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.syncevolution.org/mailman/listinfo/syncevolution
