Re: [Evolution] Manual migration of evolution to new machine
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 08:08 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 14:00 -0400, chern...@astro.cornell.edu wrote: > > > > My plan, based on the help page > > > > https://help.gnome.org/users/evolution/stable/data-storage.html.en > > > > is to copy .local/share/evolution, .config/evolution, > > .config/evolution/sources > > and .config/dconf from the week old image to the new Fedora > > installation > > (removing whatever might be there) and then add in the files > > modified in the last > > week. > > Hi, > skip the ~/.config/dconf, it contains your settings with respect of Thanks! It all seems to have worked without hitch-David - Here were the steps --perhaps they will be of use to someone else: With normal login: 0. Stored month old backup, copy of week old user directory, and most recent altered files outside the default login directory 1. Restored evo from the backup via the gui 2. Created an alternate user login account (a sledgehammer approach to avoiding the possibility of interfering gnome processes) 3. Logged out With alternate login: 4. Open terminal 5. su -i to original user account 6. cd to week old, stored version of .local/share/evolution 7. rsync -avz . ~/.local/share/evolution/ 8. cd to week old, stored version of .config/evolution 9. rsync -avz . ~/.config/evolution/ 10. repeat rsync for files most recently changed/added 10. gsettings reset-recursively org.gnome.evolution 11. dconf reset -f /org/gnome/evolution/ 12. Exit from su and then log out With normal login: 13. startup evo ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Broken formatting of citation with WebKit composer
Dear Milan, dear Ralf, Am Montag, den 08.08.2016, 11:09 +0200 schrieb Ralf Mardorf: > On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 10:57 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2016-08-07 at 15:05 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: > > > > > > > > > Citations are by default not marked as preformatted, causing them to be > > > formatted really badly with no manual interaction, as you can see with > > > the line having *better* in it. > > > > Hi, > > there is an option Edit->Preferences->Composer Preferences->Wrap quoted > > text in replies, which influences just this. It's there because the > > wrapping doesn't work for everyone, though if we'll find always-working > > solution, then the option might be removed in the future releases. > > That solved an issue for me, too :). > > Before I unchecked it (and I needed to close and restart Evolution), the > formatting looked like this: > > On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 10:57 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2016-08-07 at 15:05 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: > > > > > > > > > Citations are by default not marked as preformatted, causing them to > > > be > > > formatted really badly with no manual interaction, as you can see > > > with > > > the line having *better* in it. > > > > Hi, > > there is an option Edit->Preferences->Composer Preferences->Wrap > > quoted > > text in replies, which influences just this. It's there because the > > wrapping doesn't work for everyone, though if we'll find always- > > working > > solution, then the option might be removed in the future releases. > > But indeed, it's a little bit annoying to manually switch from > "Preformatted" to "Normal". Thank you very much. I confirm, that unselecting that option gets me the desired behavior. Thanks, Paul signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Bouncing emails
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 14:27 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 23:35 +0200, Rudolf Künzli wrote: > > > > Sir, > > You have all rights to call me an idiot even I am not such one. > > When I was much younger, in the 1985 I had an email function (BSD > > Unix) with that one I could bounce a message. > > I did get an disliked message and I could just hit "bounce" instead > > of "reply"... > > I simply did ask if such a feature exists. > > Thank you very much to call this behaviour to be childish (my age > > is 71). > > And just to complete the information on my person, I am a founder > > of Autodesk, Inc, and a developer of AutoCAD from 1982 to 1990... > > I hope you have a nice day... > > The term "bounce" is used for two completely different things. It's > also used for "redirect", where you resend a message to a new > recipient. Some people have mentioned that, but it isn't what you > want > here. > > You mean the original meaning of the word 'bounce', at the SMTP level > — > where an error message is delivered to the original sender, informing > them that the message was not delivered. > > In the 1980s it was acceptable to generate those messages "in the > wild". Leaving aside the manual "don't like it" part of your request, > that means for example that it was acceptable for mail servers to > accept an incoming mail over the network, and only *then* decide that > actually they didn't know the specific user to whom it was addressed, > and then send a bounce message back. > > The problem is, lots of unwanted emails are sent these days with > *fake* > sender addresses. So by sending a bounce to the (alleged) sender, you > make yourself part of the problem. > > So all kinds of filtering these days — not just checking that you > actually recognise the intended recipient, but spam and virus > checking > — is best done at the SMTP server before you ever accept > responsibility > for the message. It is bad practice to accept messages and then send > bounces. > > Your best option might be to configure something like CRM114 in your > mail server, trained by the messages you like and dislike, and then > it > can reject them at SMTP time according to modern practice. > As I mentioned already, I am "bouncing" messages to known senders only. I am using "redirect" which does the job. I didn't have knowledge of this feature before. Personally I guess, this thread is closed... ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Bouncing emails
On Thu, 2016-08-04 at 23:35 +0200, Rudolf Künzli wrote: > Sir, > You have all rights to call me an idiot even I am not such one. > When I was much younger, in the 1985 I had an email function (BSD Unix) with > that one I could bounce a message. > I did get an disliked message and I could just hit "bounce" instead of > "reply"... > I simply did ask if such a feature exists. > Thank you very much to call this behaviour to be childish (my age is 71). > And just to complete the information on my person, I am a founder of > Autodesk, Inc, and a developer of AutoCAD from 1982 to 1990... > I hope you have a nice day... The term "bounce" is used for two completely different things. It's also used for "redirect", where you resend a message to a new recipient. Some people have mentioned that, but it isn't what you want here. You mean the original meaning of the word 'bounce', at the SMTP level — where an error message is delivered to the original sender, informing them that the message was not delivered. In the 1980s it was acceptable to generate those messages "in the wild". Leaving aside the manual "don't like it" part of your request, that means for example that it was acceptable for mail servers to accept an incoming mail over the network, and only *then* decide that actually they didn't know the specific user to whom it was addressed, and then send a bounce message back. The problem is, lots of unwanted emails are sent these days with *fake* sender addresses. So by sending a bounce to the (alleged) sender, you make yourself part of the problem. So all kinds of filtering these days — not just checking that you actually recognise the intended recipient, but spam and virus checking — is best done at the SMTP server before you ever accept responsibility for the message. It is bad practice to accept messages and then send bounces. Your best option might be to configure something like CRM114 in your mail server, trained by the messages you like and dislike, and then it can reject them at SMTP time according to modern practice. -- dwmw2 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
