On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 13:26 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: > On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 18:29 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
I agree with 1,2,..3 and 4. I will make sure 1 will be finished soon. Probably this evening with a compile-time option (--enable-mmap) > > I'm waiting for the decision (yours) of making this optional using a > > compilation flag or at run-time. > > Let's do this in the usual manner: > > 0. Polish the patch in the usual way: make sure it follows the > indentation and naming conventions of the surrounding code, etc. > > 1. Branch evolution-data-server into HEAD (development, with Philip's > patch), and the stable branch (without the patch). > > 2. Make the patch *mandatory* in HEAD, so that it gets a good amount of > testing. > > 3. ??? > > 4. Profit!!! > > I'd suggest that (3) become "write a good stress-test suite for Camel, > independent of Evolution". We need that anyway. > > Novell already has a bunch of LDTP stuff to test the Evo mailer from the > user's viewpooint - run those tests on the patched version to see how > well they work. [Varadhan, those tests are already part of our QA > process, aren't they?] -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list