Re: [Evolution] Stability of evo?

[Andre Klapper]

On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 12:08 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> When is 3.2 expected?

September 28th, as per https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointOne#Schedule

andre
-- 
mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper | http://www.openismus.com

___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] Stability of evo?

[Svante Signell]

On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 11:42 +0200, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 25.08.2011, 11:31 +0200 schrieb Andre Klapper:
> > On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 07:12 +0200, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > > Why don't you try 3.1.5 which just became available?
> > 
> > PLEASE ALWAYS mention that 3.1.5 is an unstable release. It's not fair
> > to make average users guinea pigs by not even warning them.
> > 
> > andre
> 
> Well, I apologize, if I misjudged the situation. The maintainers
> obviously know better.
> Following mails from those average users on this list complaining about
> stability and performance problems both with the early 3.0 release and
> the 2.30 release, I found it to be responsible to recommend them either
> 2.32.xx if they use Gnome2 and - if they already have Gnome3 - just grab
> the latest bug fixes from the 3.1.xx pre-releases.

Thanks for the hints. When is 3.2 expected? I prefer to follow the
maintainer versions. Maybe I could downgrade to 2.32, is that even
possible?

___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] Stability of evo?

[Thomas Mittelstaedt]

Am Donnerstag, den 25.08.2011, 11:31 +0200 schrieb Andre Klapper:
> On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 07:12 +0200, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote:
> > Why don't you try 3.1.5 which just became available?
> 
> PLEASE ALWAYS mention that 3.1.5 is an unstable release. It's not fair
> to make average users guinea pigs by not even warning them.
> 
> andre

Well, I apologize, if I misjudged the situation. The maintainers
obviously know better.
Following mails from those average users on this list complaining about
stability and performance problems both with the early 3.0 release and
the 2.30 release, I found it to be responsible to recommend them either
2.32.xx if they use Gnome2 and - if they already have Gnome3 - just grab
the latest bug fixes from the 3.1.xx pre-releases.

-- 
thomas


___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] Stability of evo?

[Andre Klapper]

On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 07:12 +0200, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote:
> Why don't you try 3.1.5 which just became available?

PLEASE ALWAYS mention that 3.1.5 is an unstable release. It's not fair
to make average users guinea pigs by not even warning them.

andre
-- 
mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper | http://www.openismus.com

___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] Stability of evo?

[Thomas Mittelstaedt]

Am Mittwoch, den 24.08.2011, 08:34 +0200 schrieb Svante Signell:
> Hi,
> 
> After having a lot of problems with earlier 2.x versions of evo (some
> still not yet solved), at least it was semi-stable.
> 
> Now we are faced with 3.0. And of course it crashes, see e.g. Debian bug
> report #638936. 

Why don't you try 3.1.5 which just became available? If you are already
on gnome3, maybe it's better go with the most recent stuff and fixes.
I recently installed an ubuntu oneiric alpha on a vm and it had
evolution 3.1.4 on it already. Fedora also just came out with an alpha
version of F16, which may have evolution 3.1.5 on it, too.

-- 
thomas


___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] Stability of evo?

[Svante Signell]

On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 10:46 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 08:34 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > After having a lot of problems with earlier 2.x versions of evo (some
> > still not yet solved), at least it was semi-stable.
> > 
> > Now we are faced with 3.0. And of course it crashes, see e.g. Debian bug
> > report #638936. 
> 
> Upstream developers use GNOME Bugzilla so if Debian has good bug reports
> I hope that they are "upstreamed" to GNOME Bugzilla by Debian folks.

Let's wait and see.

> > In the past filing a bug report to bugzilla was not much
> > helpful, but maybe that can lift the burden a little for the DM, who is
> > just the "middle man". What do you say?
> 
> I say that I have no idea what DM is. :)

DM is Debian Maintainer, in this case Debian Evolution Maintainers


___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] Stability of evo?

[Andre Klapper]

Hi,

On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 08:34 +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> After having a lot of problems with earlier 2.x versions of evo (some
> still not yet solved), at least it was semi-stable.
> 
> Now we are faced with 3.0. And of course it crashes, see e.g. Debian bug
> report #638936. 

Upstream developers use GNOME Bugzilla so if Debian has good bug reports
I hope that they are "upstreamed" to GNOME Bugzilla by Debian folks.

> In the past filing a bug report to bugzilla was not much
> helpful, but maybe that can lift the burden a little for the DM, who is
> just the "middle man". What do you say?

I say that I have no idea what DM is. :)

> Are there more stable mail clients for gnome available, balsa, other?

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Category:Linux_email_clients

andre
-- 
mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper | http://www.openismus.com

___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Paul Smith]

On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 11:11 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 11:43 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:02 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > > I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
> > > traces:
> > 
> > Good stuff!  I modified it to just display the output on stdout, then I
> > can put it where I want it by hand.
> > 
> > Just a note: if you add "set pagination off" to your GDB script, then
> > you don't have to worry about the "type  to continue" messages,
> > redirecting from /dev/null, etc.
> > 
> > I think I'll try to integrate this with my Makefile so that it grabs
> > core dump stacktraces by default when a core happens.
> 
> Can you post an email with your latest version included or attached?
> Hopefully without the apport-unpack stuff, which isn't available on
> Fedora (though it would be a good idea to have something like this in
> Fedora).

Well, I wanted to integrate it with my "evolution-src" script that comes
with my build-evo-from-source makefile, so that if evo exited with a
core it would automatically generate the backtrace from the core.

After I took out everything I didn't need anymore, it came down to a
single line, that I wrapped in a loop so it would iterate over all the
cores in the directory; it's basically this:

#!/bin/sh

proc=$1
core=$2

gdb -batch -ex 'set pagination off' -ex 'thread apply all bt full' -ex 
'bt' \
-core "$core" "$proc"

However this loses some functionality from the original, such as
attaching to a PID etc. (which I don't need in my situation).  It does
do away with the batch file by using -ex operations which makes things
somewhat more straightforward.

I can go back and tweak out the original script if you like.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 11:43 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:02 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
> > traces:
> 
> Good stuff!  I modified it to just display the output on stdout, then I
> can put it where I want it by hand.
> 
> Just a note: if you add "set pagination off" to your GDB script, then
> you don't have to worry about the "type  to continue" messages,
> redirecting from /dev/null, etc.
> 
> I think I'll try to integrate this with my Makefile so that it grabs
> core dump stacktraces by default when a core happens.

Can you post an email with your latest version included or attached?
Hopefully without the apport-unpack stuff, which isn't available on
Fedora (though it would be a good idea to have something like this in
Fedora).

Thanks in advance - jon



___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Thu, 2009-10-15 at 11:43 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:02 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
> > traces:
> 
> Good stuff!  I modified it to just display the output on stdout, then I
> can put it where I want it by hand.

Yes, that's more Unixey than my proposal to have multiple filenames.

> Just a note: if you add "set pagination off" to your GDB script, then
> you don't have to worry about the "type  to continue" messages,
> redirecting from /dev/null, etc.

Also good.

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Paul Smith]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:02 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
> traces:

Good stuff!  I modified it to just display the output on stdout, then I
can put it where I want it by hand.

Just a note: if you add "set pagination off" to your GDB script, then
you don't have to worry about the "type  to continue" messages,
redirecting from /dev/null, etc.

I think I'll try to integrate this with my Makefile so that it grabs
core dump stacktraces by default when a core happens.


Cheers!

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:57 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:00 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > 
> > Actually, I'm not familiar with apport. Is this an Ubuntu thing?
> 
> It is.  As you can see in the script though, that that is only required
> if you give my script a /var/crash/ file.  If you really wanted to, you
> could simply remove that if (and the block after it) and just use the
> "else" block of code.  Leaving it in there does no harm though.

Yes, I already tried it on a running instance of Evo. Seems to work.
This will be more convenient that fraking around with gdb and
cut-and-paste. One suggestion: make the destination file name variable,
(e.g. /tmp/ThreadTrace--.txt, where N increments), to make
it easier to keep multiple traces.

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Brian J. Murrell]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 16:00 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> 
> Actually, I'm not familiar with apport. Is this an Ubuntu thing?

It is.  As you can see in the script though, that that is only required
if you give my script a /var/crash/ file.  If you really wanted to, you
could simply remove that if (and the block after it) and just use the
"else" block of code.  Leaving it in there does no harm though.

b.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:49 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:02 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 16:00 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > > 
> > > Description:
> > > Description of problem:
> > > Several times a day evolution freezes, doesn't respond to
> > input or
> > > refresh its window.  Generally, if I click on the window
> > decoration to
> > > delete the window, the window manager (gnome) puts up an
> > error box that
> > > evolution is not responding and asking if I want it killed.
> > 
> > These types of problems almost always require a stack trace of the
> > hung-up process.  I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
> > traces:
> [...]
> 
> Cool. I'll try that next time I have a problem.

Actually, I'm not familiar with apport. Is this an Ubuntu thing?

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:02 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 16:00 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > 
> > Description:
> > Description of problem:
> > Several times a day evolution freezes, doesn't respond to
> input or
> > refresh its window.  Generally, if I click on the window
> decoration to
> > delete the window, the window manager (gnome) puts up an
> error box that
> > evolution is not responding and asking if I want it killed.
> 
> These types of problems almost always require a stack trace of the
> hung-up process.  I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
> traces:
[...]

Cool. I'll try that next time I have a problem.

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 15:02 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> These types of problems almost always require a stack trace of the
> hung-up process.  I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
> traces:

Thanks.  Evolution has just hung, and I have put the script to use.

jon


___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 12:52 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:47 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:59 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > In this case that's right. In fact now that I've had some sleep I'd
> > > recommend the OP to take a look at
> > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=570438 since it's an
> > > LDAP-related problem I reported in February which Srini gave me a lot of
> > > help with (hint: turn off spam address checking on slow remote LDAP
> > > servers)
> > 
> > OP writes:
> > All the mail on my system is local.  Mail is brought into the system
> > using POP.  I expect to add this to BugZilla when I answer some other
> > pending questions.
> 
> Think again. The specific bug is that Evo is hanging because it's
> checking a slow/unreliable remote LDAP server for valid addresses so as
> not to file mail as Junk. AFAIK that doesn't depend on how you actually
> receive the mail. The relevant options are two tickboxes under
> Preferences->Mail Preferences->Junk. If you set "Do not mark messages as
> junk if sender is in my address book" then you should also set "Lookup
> in local address book only" unless you have full confidence in your LDAP
> service.

Very shrewd comment.  In fact "Lookup in local address book only" was
*not* checked -- now it is.  Maybe things will get better.  Except that
 1. If this is causing problems, I would expect the problems to be
worst when the program starts up, loads a lot of mail and checks
it for spam.  Nothing like that.
 2. I don't have LDAP servers specified for any of my address books.
All are local.

But this could explain why messages from people in my default address
book are getting into my Junk folder.

Thanks - jon



___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Adam Tauno Williams]

> "Devels" know about the bugs I am reporting.  I really don't think lack
> of bug reporting is the issue here.  What appears (granted, from the
> outside, so I only have one view) to be at issue here -- and Evolution
> is not really any different than most other projects -- is that the
> attraction of developing shiny, new, whiz-bang features is just far too
> attractive for anyone to want to be stuck fixing bugs, especially the
> fundamental design bugs, like the lack of scalability in the vfolder
> code/degisn.  Or even the lack of vfolders just working correctly.

That is just silly and uninformed. Porting Evolution off of the obsolete
Bonobo architecture is hardly a "whiz bang feature".  It is exactly what
you are asking for - working on fundamental design issues.

I suggest you go read the Roadmap - most of the issues being worked on
are core features, there is almost nothing "whiz bang" on the list.






___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Brian J. Murrell]

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 16:00 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> 
> Description:
> Description of problem:
> Several times a day evolution freezes, doesn't respond to input or
> refresh its window.  Generally, if I click on the window decoration to
> delete the window, the window manager (gnome) puts up an error box 
> that
> evolution is not responding and asking if I want it killed.

These types of problems almost always require a stack trace of the
hung-up process.  I have a neat little script which I use to get stack
traces:

#!/bin/bash

# get a stack trace from a running process

# where to put the stack trace
destfile=/tmp/ThreadStacktrace.txt

procname=$1
pid_or_core=$2

if [[ $procname = /var/crash/_* ]]; then
dir=$(mktemp -d ~/tmp/apport-unpack-XX)
trap "rm -rf $dir" EXIT
apport-unpack $procname $dir
ls -l $dir
cat $dir/Title $dir/ThreadStacktrace > $destfile
#strings $dir/CoreDump | less
else
if [ -z "$pid_or_core" ]; then
pid_or_core=$(pidof $procname)
fi

if [ -z "$pid_or_core" ]; then
echo "Could not find process id of a running $1"
exit 1
fi

if [[ $pid_or_core =~ ^[0-9][0-9]*$ ]]; then
procname=$(lsof -p $pid_or_core | awk "/\/$procname$/ { print \$9 }")
elif [[ $procname != /* ]]; then
procname=$(which $procname)
fi

if [ -z "$procname" ]; then
echo "Could not find location of $1"
exit 1
fi

batchfile=$(mktemp /tmp/gdb.XX)

trap "rm -f $batchfile" INT HUP EXIT

> $destfile
cat < $batchfile
set logging file $destfile
set logging on
thread apply all bt full
where
EOF

gdb -batch -x $batchfile $procname $pid_or_core  to continue, or q  to quit---//g' 
$destfile
fi

This almost always works, for any process.  For a hung up evolution you
simply run:

$ get_stacktrace evolution

and when it's done /tmp/ThreadStacktrace.txt has exactly what you need
to paste into your evolution bug report.

If evolution actually crashed you can do:

$ get_stacktrace evolution /path/to/core

and again, you get exactly what you want to paste into bugzilla.

Cheers,
b.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Brian J. Murrell]

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 17:09 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> 
> I've seen occasional hangs with 2.26.3

Admittedly I am only using 2.26.1 (with a couple of patches from
subsequent releases) but that's because nothing in any of the bugs that
I have open indicate that a newer version will cure mail ails.  But I
see crashes daily, several times a day.

> Have you reported them?

The lack of reported bugs is not the issue, trust me.  I have reported
many, many bugs.  In fact my "Unresolved Evolution bugs" search returns
36 currently.  That's just my reported bugs in case that wasn't clear.

> Don't assume the devels know that there's a
> problem, and don't just report it here as most devels don't read the
> list.

"Devels" know about the bugs I am reporting.  I really don't think lack
of bug reporting is the issue here.  What appears (granted, from the
outside, so I only have one view) to be at issue here -- and Evolution
is not really any different than most other projects -- is that the
attraction of developing shiny, new, whiz-bang features is just far too
attractive for anyone to want to be stuck fixing bugs, especially the
fundamental design bugs, like the lack of scalability in the vfolder
code/degisn.  Or even the lack of vfolders just working correctly.

I'm sure everyone has heard my whining about vfolders and scaling and
whatnot.  My point really was that it's not a lack of bugs or developer
knowledge of problems that's preventing them from being fixed.

I have trouble just getting developers to post a progress update to
bugs, even after I have asked for one.  They won't even say "no
progress".  They just ignore the request.

Sadly, I am becoming more and more sceptical of Linux becoming a
workable alternative solution for my (mom's) desktop computing needs and
evolution is becoming a bigger part of that scepticism with every
release made.  I've been an evolution user since the early days and
given the past few releases, I'm really not holding my breath for 2.28.

Unfortunately, there is really just no viable alternative to the
functionality that evolution provides -- without cobbling together a
bunch of other/different apps that have no integration between them,

b.



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:47 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:59 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > In this case that's right. In fact now that I've had some sleep I'd
> > recommend the OP to take a look at
> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=570438 since it's an
> > LDAP-related problem I reported in February which Srini gave me a lot of
> > help with (hint: turn off spam address checking on slow remote LDAP
> > servers)
> 
> OP writes:
> All the mail on my system is local.  Mail is brought into the system
> using POP.  I expect to add this to BugZilla when I answer some other
> pending questions.

Think again. The specific bug is that Evo is hanging because it's
checking a slow/unreliable remote LDAP server for valid addresses so as
not to file mail as Junk. AFAIK that doesn't depend on how you actually
receive the mail. The relevant options are two tickboxes under
Preferences->Mail Preferences->Junk. If you set "Do not mark messages as
junk if sender is in my address book" then you should also set "Lookup
in local address book only" unless you have full confidence in your LDAP
service.

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 12:50 -0400, Ben May wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:47 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:59 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > In this case that's right. In fact now that I've had some sleep I'd
> > > recommend the OP to take a look at
> > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=570438 since it's an
> > > LDAP-related problem I reported in February which Srini gave me a lot of
> > > help with (hint: turn off spam address checking on slow remote LDAP
> > > servers)
> > 
> > OP writes:
> > All the mail on my system is local.  Mail is brought into the system
> > using POP.  I expect to add this to BugZilla when I answer some other
> > pending questions.
> > 
> > jon
> 
> I just wanted to add that I have absolutely no stability or performance
> problems with Evolution Mail. At least not since I gave up on the MAPI
> plugin which was causing MASSIVE memory leaks.
> 
> Of course I have a very burly system...

OP forgot to add a description of his system, which is:
4 processor x86_64 with 8 Gb Memory
Fairly reliable DSL connection

jon



___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Ben May]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:47 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:59 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > In this case that's right. In fact now that I've had some sleep I'd
> > recommend the OP to take a look at
> > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=570438 since it's an
> > LDAP-related problem I reported in February which Srini gave me a lot of
> > help with (hint: turn off spam address checking on slow remote LDAP
> > servers)
> 
> OP writes:
> All the mail on my system is local.  Mail is brought into the system
> using POP.  I expect to add this to BugZilla when I answer some other
> pending questions.
> 
> jon

I just wanted to add that I have absolutely no stability or performance
problems with Evolution Mail. At least not since I gave up on the MAPI
plugin which was causing MASSIVE memory leaks.

Of course I have a very burly system...
-  


Benjamin May
Sr. Research Analyst
+(212) 851-4772
ma...@columbia.edu

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 09:59 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> In this case that's right. In fact now that I've had some sleep I'd
> recommend the OP to take a look at
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=570438 since it's an
> LDAP-related problem I reported in February which Srini gave me a lot of
> help with (hint: turn off spam address checking on slow remote LDAP
> servers)

OP writes:
All the mail on my system is local.  Mail is brought into the system
using POP.  I expect to add this to BugZilla when I answer some other
pending questions.

jon


___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Adam Tauno Williams]

> If this is really not configurable, you're using a buggy and wrong MTA.
> I have noticed this on my BB as well and I haven't looked into the
> configuration to see but I make it a personal note not to reply to lists on
> my BB for this reason.

I use SnapperMail on a Palm OS device,  it seems to do quoting quite
well and lets me edit the entirety of a reply.  The only problem I have
with it is that it occasionally does some really funky stuff with line
wraps / long lines.

Sadly it is only available for Palm OS [AFAIK] which means I won't be
using it for too much longer.  

But for anyone with a Palm OS device I recommend it.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 04:39 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 01:57 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 00:48 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> > > Most importantly, you MUST always describe your environment
> > > completely:
> > > for Evo in particular this means what type of email are you reading?
> > > Local spool?  POP/POP3?  IMAP?  Exchange using the old
> > > evolution-exchange backend?  Exchange using the new evolution-mapi
> > > backend?  What is your mail store: standard/maildir/etc.?  Do you
> > > attach
> > > to any special calendar, or do you just use local calendars?  Have you
> > > configured an LDAP server for contacts, or just local contacts?  Any
> > > special plugins you've installed?  Are your mail folders unusually
> > > large?  Do you have lots of filters or complex filters?
> > 
> > We don't want to scare people off Paul :-) Judging by the balance of
> > problems discussed on this list, I'd say the absolutely essential info
> > is the Evo version and distro, and the type of mailstore (local, POP,
> > IMAP, Exchange etc.) because if you don't mention it, it's the first
> > thing anyone is going to ask.
> > 
> > For the rest, use your judgment (e.g. if you have problems with
> > contacts, explain how you have them configured, ditto with filters
> > etc.).
> 
> Normally true, but if you have completely unexplained hangs, as the OP
> seemed to have, it could also be something else: if you use LDAP maybe
> it's a problem connecting to your LDAP server; if you use google
> calendars or webdav or something maybe it's a problem connecting to that
> to get calendar updates.  It might be some weird spam filter issue.
> Etc.

In this case that's right. In fact now that I've had some sleep I'd
recommend the OP to take a look at
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=570438 since it's an
LDAP-related problem I reported in February which Srini gave me a lot of
help with (hint: turn off spam address checking on slow remote LDAP
servers)

> More information is never a bad thing.

That's true of course, but we're talking about info you MUST provide in
a bug report (your words).

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Paul Smith]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 01:57 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 00:48 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> > Most importantly, you MUST always describe your environment
> > completely:
> > for Evo in particular this means what type of email are you reading?
> > Local spool?  POP/POP3?  IMAP?  Exchange using the old
> > evolution-exchange backend?  Exchange using the new evolution-mapi
> > backend?  What is your mail store: standard/maildir/etc.?  Do you
> > attach
> > to any special calendar, or do you just use local calendars?  Have you
> > configured an LDAP server for contacts, or just local contacts?  Any
> > special plugins you've installed?  Are your mail folders unusually
> > large?  Do you have lots of filters or complex filters?
> 
> We don't want to scare people off Paul :-) Judging by the balance of
> problems discussed on this list, I'd say the absolutely essential info
> is the Evo version and distro, and the type of mailstore (local, POP,
> IMAP, Exchange etc.) because if you don't mention it, it's the first
> thing anyone is going to ask.
> 
> For the rest, use your judgment (e.g. if you have problems with
> contacts, explain how you have them configured, ditto with filters
> etc.).

Normally true, but if you have completely unexplained hangs, as the OP
seemed to have, it could also be something else: if you use LDAP maybe
it's a problem connecting to your LDAP server; if you use google
calendars or webdav or something maybe it's a problem connecting to that
to get calendar updates.  It might be some weird spam filter issue.
Etc.

More information is never a bad thing.
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 00:48 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> Most importantly, you MUST always describe your environment
> completely:
> for Evo in particular this means what type of email are you reading?
> Local spool?  POP/POP3?  IMAP?  Exchange using the old
> evolution-exchange backend?  Exchange using the new evolution-mapi
> backend?  What is your mail store: standard/maildir/etc.?  Do you
> attach
> to any special calendar, or do you just use local calendars?  Have you
> configured an LDAP server for contacts, or just local contacts?  Any
> special plugins you've installed?  Are your mail folders unusually
> large?  Do you have lots of filters or complex filters?

We don't want to scare people off Paul :-) Judging by the balance of
problems discussed on this list, I'd say the absolutely essential info
is the Evo version and distro, and the type of mailstore (local, POP,
IMAP, Exchange etc.) because if you don't mention it, it's the first
thing anyone is going to ask.

For the rest, use your judgment (e.g. if you have problems with
contacts, explain how you have them configured, ditto with filters
etc.).

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability (was: Re: Evolution-list Digest, Vol 51, Issue 20)

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

Please don't reply to digests.

1- The Subject is meaningless unless you edit it (see above)
2- It breaks the threading
3- In many cases (though not this time) clueless users quote the entire
digest in order to reply to one message.

Note that you can post via Gmane if you don't want to subscribe in the
usual way. It's not ideal either but it's better than nothing.

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 22:40 -0600, Tim McConnell wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 03:57 +, evolution-list-requ...@gnome.org
> wrote:
[...]
> > 1) Reliablity. A program should work all of the time, it should never
> > crash or hang. Nothing else matters if a program is as unstable as
> > Evolution has become.
> I have F11 fully updated and it never crashes or hangs for me. Maybe Poc
> could tell how to restart GNOME and you could run GDB on GNOME (to
> ensure it is actually a problem with Evo and not another process that is
> causing the problem.) to see where it hangs/freezes on you. There is a
> link in the FAQ's on what to install for proper debugging. 

I don't know if "running gdb on Gnome" means anything. I can't imagine
running an entire desktop under a debugger. Maybe you mean running Evo
under gdb. That's certainly possible but probably it's easier to wait
for a freeze, then attach gdb to the process and get a stack trace. IIRC
there's info on go.evolution.org on how to do this (I've done it but I
forget at the moment, it's 1:40am :-). You then have to cut and paste
the trace output into a file and attach it to a BZ report, but it's
doable and gives the devels something to chew on.

Note that you need the debugging RPMs for Evo and everything it depends
on if the trace is to be meaningful. On Fedora, do "debuginfo-install
evolution" as root, then go and have a cup of coffee while it downloads
a zillion files.

> > 
> > 2) Speed. Once a program is reliable the next most important thing is
> > speed, ideally every thing should be instantaneous. Evolution has gotten
> > slower and slower. In Fedora 11 it takes 10 minutes to sort through the
> > virtual folders when it's opened, and if it has to convert from and
> > earlier version it can take a full day (on a Core2, God knows how long
> > it takes on older hardware) to do the conversion.
> 
> How many vfolders do you have? I have 46 with sub-folders in three of
> them and it takes me less than a minute to start Evo. 
> > 
> > 3) Features. This is dead last especially in the case of Evolution which
> > is already very feature rich. 
> Don't really agree with that statement, a "feature" I have seen multiple
> requests for is the ability to easily edit the filters/ message rules. I
> would love to see that happen.

What's hard about editing the filters? I'd much prefer an effort to make
it easier to dump and restore filters (e.g. on a different machine).

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Paul Smith]

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 16:21 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > Also, when mentioning a BZ report here on the list it's conventional to
> > give the bug number (or better, the URL of the BZ page) in case someone
> > wants to add anything.
> 
> Also quite right.  It's bug 528393.
>   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528393

Although you think you have nothing useful to add, in fact you have a
wealth of information you _should_ provide in this bug (indeed, in every
bug reported, for any program); this is especially critical if you can't
narrow the problem down to a particular area based on its behavior:

Most importantly, you MUST always describe your environment completely:
for Evo in particular this means what type of email are you reading?
Local spool?  POP/POP3?  IMAP?  Exchange using the old
evolution-exchange backend?  Exchange using the new evolution-mapi
backend?  What is your mail store: standard/maildir/etc.?  Do you attach
to any special calendar, or do you just use local calendars?  Have you
configured an LDAP server for contacts, or just local contacts?  Any
special plugins you've installed?  Are your mail folders unusually
large?  Do you have lots of filters or complex filters?

Is anything "common" about when Evo freezes?  When it freezes, is it
always when you click Send/Receive?  Only happens when you're reading
mail?  Responding to mail?  Does it happen even when you're not
interacting with the application at all?  Are there messages in the
system log?  Are there messages in your session log (often
~/.xsession-errors, although I don't know about Fedora)?

If you use "top" or some other tool to view the system load, is
evolution or evolution-data-server, etc., still using CPU/using lots of
CPU (e.g. is it spinning, or waiting)?  What about RAM?

There are debugging flags, etc. you could enable as well that are
described on the web site, but that's more advanced work.  There are
other advanced techniques such as using strace, forcing a core dump, or
attaching to the running process with a debugger.  If you know how to do
these things that's very helpful; if not someone may ask you to do them
(and explain how) in response to your bug.  However, the information
similar to the above should be basic detail provided with every bug
report.


HTH!
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 18:36 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 16:00 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 17:09 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > Have you reported them? Don't assume the devels know that there's a
> > > problem, and don't just report it here as most devels don't read the
> > > list.
> > 
> > Well, I did it.  Now I feel like an idiot.  Briefly the description 
> > is "Evolution freezes.  Start it and watch it crash."  If I were a
> > developer, I'd go right on to something else.
> 
> You said earlier that it crashed, which isn't what your BZ report says.
> Crashing and freezing are different things. In many ways debugging a
> crash is much easier since you can get a core dump. Debugging a freeze
> means trying to narrow down the exact conditions that make it occur.

Quite right.  I realized when going over the thread that I should have
described the problem as a freeze and not a crash.  I suspect my
description would have made this clear, since the window remained in
existence (otherwise how could I have closed it), as it would not have
in a crash, but describing the problem as a freeze makes the report much
clearer.

> Also, when mentioning a BZ report here on the list it's conventional to
> give the bug number (or better, the URL of the BZ page) in case someone
> wants to add anything.

Also quite right.  It's bug 528393.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=528393

jon







___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 16:00 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 17:09 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > Have you reported them? Don't assume the devels know that there's a
> > problem, and don't just report it here as most devels don't read the
> > list.
> 
> Well, I did it.  Now I feel like an idiot.  Briefly the description 
> is "Evolution freezes.  Start it and watch it crash."  If I were a
> developer, I'd go right on to something else.

You said earlier that it crashed, which isn't what your BZ report says.
Crashing and freezing are different things. In many ways debugging a
crash is much easier since you can get a core dump. Debugging a freeze
means trying to narrow down the exact conditions that make it occur.

Also, when mentioning a BZ report here on the list it's conventional to
give the bug number (or better, the URL of the BZ page) in case someone
wants to add anything.

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 17:09 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> Have you reported them? Don't assume the devels know that there's a
> problem, and don't just report it here as most devels don't read the
> list.

Well, I did it.  Now I feel like an idiot.  Briefly the description 
is "Evolution freezes.  Start it and watch it crash."  If I were a
developer, I'd go right on to something else.

== The actual bugzilla entry follows ==

Summary:
Evolution freezes frequently

Description:
Description of problem:
Several times a day evolution freezes, doesn't respond to input or
refresh its window.  Generally, if I click on the window decoration to
delete the window, the window manager (gnome) puts up an error box that
evolution is not responding and asking if I want it killed.  When I
respond yes and restart evolution it runs fine for a while, then crashes
again after a while.  Sometimes no box appears (evolution must be
responding to a message from the window manager, though nothing is
visible on the screen), and in this case evolution has to be killed from
a command window.  All of these crashes seem to be quite random: the
evolution window can be visible on hidden (when visible) displaying or
composing mail or doing nothing.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
evolution-2.26.3-1.fc11.x86_64


How reproducible:
Not very.


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start Evolution
2. Wait for it to freeze


Actual results:
Evolution freezes


Expected results:
Evolution continues to run OK


Additional info:
I know this is not very helpful, but I have been advised to post this 
to 
the bugzilla, since developers don't follow the evolution mailing list.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Sun, 2009-10-11 at 13:10 -0700, Jonathan Ryshpan wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> > I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> > 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> 
> I too have had chronic stability problems with Evolution, namely
> evolution-2.26.3 running under Fedora 11 with all upgrades on an x86_64
> system.
> 
> Several times a day evolution crashes, doesn't respond to input or
> refresh its window.  Generally, if I click on the window decoration to
> delete the window, the window manager (gnome) puts up an error box that
> evolution is not responding and asking if I want it killed.  When I
> respond yes and restart evolution it runs fine for a while, then crashes
> again after a while.  Sometimes no box appears (evolution must be
> responding to a message from the window manager, though nothing is
> visible on the screen), and in this case evolution has to be killed from
> a command window.  All of these crashes seem to be quite random: the
> evolution window can be visible on hidden (when visible) displaying or
> composing mail or doing nothing.

I've seen occasional hangs with 2.26.3 but no crashes that I can recall.
I'm using KDE but in all other respects I have the same setup as you. If
you get an actual crash -- Evo just disappears for example -- look at
the end of /var/log/messages to see if some component had a fatal error
and if so then definitely report it either to the Fedora BZ or to the
Gnome one.

> Has there been any progress fixing these crashes lately?

Have you reported them? Don't assume the devels know that there's a
problem, and don't just report it here as most devels don't read the
list.

> Evolution-2.26.3 is the latest from the Fedora repositories, but the
> evolution web site states that 2.28.0 is now out.

And will appear with Fedora 12 in a few weeks time, not before. The
Fedora and Gnome releases tend to be in sync every 6 months (not
counting bugfixes).

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/stability

[Jonathan Ryshpan]

On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).

I too have had chronic stability problems with Evolution, namely
evolution-2.26.3 running under Fedora 11 with all upgrades on an x86_64
system.

Several times a day evolution crashes, doesn't respond to input or
refresh its window.  Generally, if I click on the window decoration to
delete the window, the window manager (gnome) puts up an error box that
evolution is not responding and asking if I want it killed.  When I
respond yes and restart evolution it runs fine for a while, then crashes
again after a while.  Sometimes no box appears (evolution must be
responding to a message from the window manager, though nothing is
visible on the screen), and in this case evolution has to be killed from
a command window.  All of these crashes seem to be quite random: the
evolution window can be visible on hidden (when visible) displaying or
composing mail or doing nothing.

Has there been any progress fixing these crashes lately?
Evolution-2.26.3 is the latest from the Fedora repositories, but the
evolution web site states that 2.28.0 is now out.

jon


___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Reid

[Paul Smith]

On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 15:01 -0400, Reid Thompson wrote:
> if you recall offhand the steps, i'd appreciate a quick posting of how
> to configure it to work the old way..  if you have to think more than
> a min for the steps don't bother, i'll figure it out/google it

No problem.  It's a bit non-obvious but open a terminal and type:

gconftool -s --type bool /apps/update-notifier/auto_launch false

You can use the graphical editor too, but this is simpler IMO.  If you
disable auto-launch then it will automatically use the old notifier.

I've read ALL the arguments on the various lists for this new behavior
and none of them convince me.  It's particularly bad for me because I
set my system up with 8 different desktops (screens/whatever), and on
many of them I have windows that are maximized all the time.  Also, at
work I have two monitors and I use one monitor for a browser that I
leave running all the time, maximized, with "Always on Visible
Workspace" set, because so many of the things I do need a browser.  This
means that most of the time when the update-manager pops up its started
behind something that I'll never minimize, and when I come in in the
morning and start work I might switch away from that screen, do some
other things, etc.  I've gone for many many days without realizing that
the update-manager is sitting behind some maximized window, waiting for
me to update.

I think the whole idea of this auto-popup of the manager is just silly:
a clear instance of made-up policy trumping good sense.  But as long as
I can always switch it back, I don't care that much.


Have fun!
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Reid

[Adam Tauno Williams]

> My understanding is that the RPM based distros like newer Fedoras have
> also figured out how to get this kind of stability, for the most part; I
> don't use them so I can't say.

A long time ago.  Package management on all current mainstream
distributions is equivalent.  You can practically use a regular
expression to just rewrite the syntax between apt/yum/zypper.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Reid

[Reid Thompson]

On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 11:12 -0700, bg wrote:

> Athlon 2.6 with 1Gb RAM, 160Gb RAID Level 1 array.
> 
would work fine for ubuntu or gentoo depending on what effort you want
to put into your distro

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Reid

[Reid Thompson]

On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 14:50 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> Anyway, FYI nothing happens _automatically_; what happens is when
> there
> are packages available for upgrade you get an icon in your
> notification
> area[*] which you can select to open the update manager.  You can then
> choose whether to install the new packages, or not, or even install
> only
> some of them.  The package manager won't let you install an
> inconsistent
> set of packages.
> 
^^^
what he said
> 
> -
> [*] Starting with Ubuntu 9.04 you don't get the notification icon by
> default; instead your update manager opens itself.  It checks daily
> for
> security updates and weekly for non-security-related updates.
> Personally I really don't like this--for one thing the damn update
> manager always pops itself BEHIND all my other windows so I never see
> it) so I reconfigured it to work the old way. 

if you recall offhand the steps, i'd appreciate a quick posting of how
to configure it to work the old way..  if you have to think more than a
min for the steps don't bother, i'll figure it out/google it

thanks,
reid
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Reid

[Paul Smith]

On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 11:12 -0700, bg wrote:
> > what specs does your box have?
> 
> Athlon 2.6 with 1Gb RAM, 160Gb RAID Level 1 array.
> 
> I've been experimenting with Ubuntu 8.10 on another machine.
> One of the things that both looks attractive about Ubuntu,
> and also generates a bit of apprehension, is the automatic
> "hands-off" updating. I'm not yet convinced that's really
> a good idea. What with dependencies and libraries and all
> the other potentially mismatched areas when changing software
> versions, I have some difficulty believing that it's even
> possible to reliably automate that process. But I could be wrong.

Heh!  Spoken like someone who's been stuck with a really old RPM-based
distro for a long time :-).  This kind of problem is mostly ancient
history.

Debian had solved this problem completely a long time ago: I couldn't
believe it either when I first switched from Red Hat 6.2 (RPM hell!!) to
Debian... and it Just Worked!  I never reinstalled Debian once in all
the years I was using it: I upgraded it using apt-get exclusively.  I
was even using the Debian "testing" (and some "unstable") distribution
there for a year or two before I switched to Ubuntu, with no issues.

Ubuntu inherited that stability of package management: I moved my home
system from Debian to Ubuntu 5.04 (Hoary Hedgehog) and since then I've
upgraded to every release (currently up to 8.04 as I mentioned before)
using standard upgrades: no reinstalls.  I've also been applying
security upgrades almost daily, every day, since then.

Although I can't say for sure nothing's ever broken, I CAN say I don't
_remember_ anything ever breaking--so if it did it was (a) a long time
ago, (b) not very painful, and (c) quickly fixed.


My understanding is that the RPM based distros like newer Fedoras have
also figured out how to get this kind of stability, for the most part; I
don't use them so I can't say.


Anyway, FYI nothing happens _automatically_; what happens is when there
are packages available for upgrade you get an icon in your notification
area[*] which you can select to open the update manager.  You can then
choose whether to install the new packages, or not, or even install only
some of them.  The package manager won't let you install an inconsistent
set of packages.


-
[*] Starting with Ubuntu 9.04 you don't get the notification icon by
default; instead your update manager opens itself.  It checks daily for
security updates and weekly for non-security-related updates.
Personally I really don't like this--for one thing the damn update
manager always pops itself BEHIND all my other windows so I never see
it) so I reconfigured it to work the old way.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Reid

[bg]

On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 09:22, Reid Thompson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 09:03:18AM -0700, bg wrote:
> > 
> > Older than dirt - Core2. 
> > 
> > It's pretty stable, though. The only real problem that's beginning
> > to get annoying is the Mozilla 1.7 browser, with the increasing
> > number of web pages it refuses to read, even with as late a
> > vintage plug-ins as I can cram into it  :-)
> > 
> > I'm probably going to be upgrading within the next 30 days.
> > I've been considering Ubuntu 9.04. Any suggestions?
> > 
> > 
> ubuntu is nice -- easily maintained
> And the make scripts provided by
> Paul/others makes running from git ( if you have the desire ) fairly
> straightforward.
> 
> If you're into that kind of thing, gentoo is good.  And actually quite
> stable.  I run ubuntu at home right now and gentoo at work.  I've run
> gentoo at home before and will again as soon as i get a decent spare
> box.
> 
> what specs does your box have?
> 
> reid

Athlon 2.6 with 1Gb RAM, 160Gb RAID Level 1 array.

I've been experimenting with Ubuntu 8.10 on another machine.
One of the things that both looks attractive about Ubuntu,
and also generates a bit of apprehension, is the automatic
"hands-off" updating. I'm not yet convinced that's really
a good idea. What with dependencies and libraries and all
the other potentially mismatched areas when changing software
versions, I have some difficulty believing that it's even
possible to reliably automate that process. But I could be wrong.

Brewster
-- 
***
Embrace a sharing community of sustainable low-carbon diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/xavier

[Reid Thompson]

On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 12:22:15PM -0400, Reid Thompson wrote:
> And the make scripts provided by
> Paul/others makes running from git ( if you have the desire ) fairly
   ^
   evolution
> straightforward.
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/xavier

[Reid Thompson]

On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 09:03:18AM -0700, bg wrote:
> 
> Older than dirt - Core2. 
> 
> It's pretty stable, though. The only real problem that's beginning
> to get annoying is the Mozilla 1.7 browser, with the increasing
> number of web pages it refuses to read, even with as late a
> vintage plug-ins as I can cram into it  :-)
> 
> I'm probably going to be upgrading within the next 30 days.
> I've been considering Ubuntu 9.04. Any suggestions?
> 
> 
ubuntu is nice -- easily maintained
And the make scripts provided by
Paul/others makes running from git ( if you have the desire ) fairly
straightforward.

If you're into that kind of thing, gentoo is good.  And actually quite
stable.  I run ubuntu at home right now and gentoo at work.  I've run
gentoo at home before and will again as soon as i get a decent spare
box.

what specs does your box have?

reid
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/xavier

[bg]

> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 18:09 -0700, bg wrote:
> > Maybe my version of Evo is
> > too ancient (a distinct possibility)

Xavier Bestel wrote:

> Wow .. you're using "Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2)" !!
> I didn't known it was possible to still use such an ancient beast. How
> old is your linux distro ?
> 
>   Xav

bg:

Older than dirt - Core2. 

It's pretty stable, though. The only real problem that's beginning
to get annoying is the Mozilla 1.7 browser, with the increasing
number of web pages it refuses to read, even with as late a
vintage plug-ins as I can cram into it  :-)

I'm probably going to be upgrading within the next 30 days.
I've been considering Ubuntu 9.04. Any suggestions?


Brewster
-- 
***
Embrace a justice sharing community of sustainable low-carbon diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:48 -0700, David L wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 9:08 AM, bg wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 08:12, Ben May wrote:
> >
> > Likewise. I can't believe there are so many people who think you
> > have to "reconfigure" an email program in order to move the cursor
> > anywhere you want :-)
> 
> In all seriousness though, in the last year or so, evolution
> won't let me position the cursor in the middle of a
> reply and hit return without making it look like my
> inserted text is part of the original message... ie, it adds
> a ">" at the beginning of each line so I can't interleave
> my response without it looking like the original poster was
> answering their own questions.  How do I fix that?  I bet I
> have to reconfigure evolution. ;)  This only happens with
> certain emails... these emails get a little dotted box around
> the text of the original message whenever I click anywhere
> in the message.  Any ideas?

It happens when the original message is formatted in HTML (more
brokenness, but let's not go there).

However I believe there is a bug in Evo when you reply to a
multipart/alternative message. Even if you configure Evo to compose in
plain text, if the message you're replying to has an HTML part, that's
the one Evo will select. The workaround is to select the text you're
replying to before hitting Reply.

See https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=595955

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 11:23 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> > The way most emailers default in the reply edit mode is to position
> > your cursor at the top of the original. The reason this is done
> > is apparently, unaccountably, non-obvious to millions of the
> > NetNewbies of the past several years. The reason it positions that
> > way is to encourage the user to drill down through the original
> > post,
> 
> While all this is true,  I agree completely, it is utterly pointless
> to
> point it out.  The vast vast majority of people DO NOT CARE about
> netiquette (or the convenience of subsequent readers).  Thus you are
> wasting bandwidth and every other readers time.  Hashing these things
> with people WHO DO NOT CARE is pointless.

I disagree. I make it a point of noting (politely!) when people
top-post. If no-one ever mentions it, how is the clueless newbie going
to learn? OTOH a long diatribe in answer to every transgression gets old
very fast. The compromise I've settled on is to keep the complaint to
one line and only do it if I was going to reply anyway.

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/DavidL

[Xavier Bestel]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 18:09 -0700, bg wrote:
> Maybe my version of Evo is
> too ancient (a distinct possibility)

Wow .. you're using "Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2)" !!
I didn't known it was possible to still use such an ancient beast. How
old is your linux distro ?

Xav



___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/DavidL

[Ng Oon-Ee]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 18:09 -0700, bg wrote:
> 
> Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
> 
> > I've found that for multi-part messages, if instead of clicking
> > 'Reply' (or 'Reply to all'), you select the text of the message and then
> > click the appropriate button, it replies properly to the text, meaning
> > no dotted box and no problems formatting. Try it out.
> 
> bg:
> 
> I did, just now, and it didn't fly. Maybe my version of Evo is
> too ancient (a distinct possibility) or maybe I'm not understanding the
> instructions. I highlighted the entire block in the original message as
> received, and assumed that by "the appropriate button"
> you meant "REPLY". Smacking that with the original selected, though
> it did shift me, as expected, into REPLY EDIT mode,  did *not*
> banish the dotted line box around the text, nor any of the
> formatting as near as I could determine.
> 
> Brewster


Try with just one part of the message. Start with a single paragraph.
I'm not sure exactly what its doing, but generally works for me when
replying to emails from product suppliers, only reply to their own part
(which is generally text) while ignoring all the advertorials which make
up 90% of the email.

So, if the email looks like:-

-

XXX has said:-



/* LOTS OF COLOURFUL ADVERTS */

-

I'd just highlight the part labelled .

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/DavidL

[bg]

> > On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:48, David L wrote:
> > > This only happens with
> > > certain emails... these emails get a little dotted box around
> > > the text of the original message whenever I click anywhere
> > > in the message.  Any ideas?
> > 
> > bg:
> > 
> > I wish I knew an answer to that, but I doubt there is one.
> > As near as I can tell, the dotted-line box is an artifact of
> > the sender, who has chosen to format their message in other
> > than plain old unvarnished ASCII text, apparently in a
> > desire to make their emails "prettier", or perhaps just from
> > general cluelessness.
> > 
> > The latter category might benefit from some remediation.
> > The former should just be disemboweled and their messy corpses
> > left in the ditch as a caution to others. Which would include
> > any and all users of "IncrediMail", if it's still around :-)
> > 
> > Brewster

Ng Oon-Ee wrote:

> I've found that for multi-part messages, if instead of clicking
> 'Reply' (or 'Reply to all'), you select the text of the message and then
> click the appropriate button, it replies properly to the text, meaning
> no dotted box and no problems formatting. Try it out.

bg:

I did, just now, and it didn't fly. Maybe my version of Evo is
too ancient (a distinct possibility) or maybe I'm not understanding the
instructions. I highlighted the entire block in the original message as
received, and assumed that by "the appropriate button"
you meant "REPLY". Smacking that with the original selected, though
it did shift me, as expected, into REPLY EDIT mode,  did *not*
banish the dotted line box around the text, nor any of the
formatting as near as I could determine.

Brewster

 
-- 
***
Embrace a sharing community of sustainable low-carbon diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/DavidL

[Ng Oon-Ee]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 10:02 -0700, bg wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:48, David L wrote:
> > This only happens with
> > certain emails... these emails get a little dotted box around
> > the text of the original message whenever I click anywhere
> > in the message.  Any ideas?
> 
> bg:
> 
> I wish I knew an answer to that, but I doubt there is one.
> As near as I can tell, the dotted-line box is an artifact of
> the sender, who has chosen to format their message in other
> than plain old unvarnished ASCII text, apparently in a
> desire to make their emails "prettier", or perhaps just from
> general cluelessness.
> 
> The latter category might benefit from some remediation.
> The former should just be disemboweled and their messy corpses
> left in the ditch as a caution to others. Which would include
> any and all users of "IncrediMail", if it's still around :-)
> 
> Brewster

I've found that for multi-part messages, if instead of clicking
'Reply' (or 'Reply to all'), you select the text of the message and then
click the appropriate button, it replies properly to the text, meaning
no dotted box and no problems formatting. Try it out.

Of course, all formatting is lost (even paragraphing), but if they
didn't send you a well-formatted email, why not return the favour. Works
with forwarding too.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Pete Biggs]

> 
> In all seriousness though, in the last year or so, evolution
> won't let me position the cursor in the middle of a
> reply and hit return without making it look like my
> inserted text is part of the original message... ie, it adds
> a ">" at the beginning of each line so I can't interleave
> my response without it looking like the original poster was
> answering their own questions.  How do I fix that?  I bet I
> have to reconfigure evolution. ;)  This only happens with
> certain emails... these emails get a little dotted box around
> the text of the original message whenever I click anywhere
> in the message.  Any ideas?

Yes, it's because the email you are replying to is in HTML and the Evo
composer is having problems trying to work out where in the complexity
of the crap html that it needs to put your text.  It's usually something
to do with tables and nested div sections.

Yes, this even applies if you are replying in "plain text" - the
composer is still aware of the HTML in the original message.

As a rule of thumb - if there is a dotted box around the text, then Evo
can't put your reply into the middle of it.  If you can find a junction
between two dotted boxes, then often you can put a reply in correctly.

I believe there is new composer in the pipeline for Evo - but I don't
know if it will be any better at dealing with HTML.  The answer is, of
course for no one to use HTML in emails - but then people wouldn't be
able to have their cutesy little pictures and oh so clever formatting.

P.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/DavidL

[bg]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:48, David L wrote:
> This only happens with
> certain emails... these emails get a little dotted box around
> the text of the original message whenever I click anywhere
> in the message.  Any ideas?

bg:

I wish I knew an answer to that, but I doubt there is one.
As near as I can tell, the dotted-line box is an artifact of
the sender, who has chosen to format their message in other
than plain old unvarnished ASCII text, apparently in a
desire to make their emails "prettier", or perhaps just from
general cluelessness.

The latter category might benefit from some remediation.
The former should just be disemboweled and their messy corpses
left in the ditch as a caution to others. Which would include
any and all users of "IncrediMail", if it's still around :-)

Brewster
-- 
***
Embrace a sharing community of sustainable low-carbon diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[David L]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 9:08 AM, bg wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 08:12, Ben May wrote:
>
> Likewise. I can't believe there are so many people who think you
> have to "reconfigure" an email program in order to move the cursor
> anywhere you want :-)

In all seriousness though, in the last year or so, evolution
won't let me position the cursor in the middle of a
reply and hit return without making it look like my
inserted text is part of the original message... ie, it adds
a ">" at the beginning of each line so I can't interleave
my response without it looking like the original poster was
answering their own questions.  How do I fix that?  I bet I
have to reconfigure evolution. ;)  This only happens with
certain emails... these emails get a little dotted box around
the text of the original message whenever I click anywhere
in the message.  Any ideas?

thanks,

   David
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Xavier Bestel]

Hi Charles,

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:22 -0600, Charles J Killian wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Oh please!
> 
> Piss off!
> 
> The day that how one formats a response to an email is some measure of
> the quality of the individual writing it and the value of that response
> is the day I go back to a yellow pad and pencil.

On technical mailing-lists, between someone who takes care of quoting
correctly and follows the netiquette, and someone who just dumps the
entire thread with an added top-post blurb, my choice of who will be the
next person I'll help is quickly done.

Xav



___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/williams

[bg]

Brewster Gillett:
> > The way most emailers default in the reply edit mode is to position
> > your cursor at the top of the original. The reason this is done
> > is apparently, unaccountably, non-obvious to millions of the
> > NetNewbies of the past several years. The reason it positions that
> > way is to encourage the user to drill down through the original
> > post,

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

> While all this is true,  I agree completely, it is utterly pointless to
> point it out.  The vast vast majority of people DO NOT CARE about
> netiquette (or the convenience of subsequent readers).  

bg:

How very right you are. It's pleasant to read that there are others
who fully understand.

williams:

> Thus you are
> wasting bandwidth and every other readers time.  Hashing these things
> with people WHO DO NOT CARE is pointless.

bg:

I plead guilty, Adam - 99% of the time I just let it pass. But
this was something new - when someone informed us that they had
to "reconfigure" their emailer in order to alternate between top
and bottom posting. I confess, that pushed me over the edge :-)
I'll try not to do it again for a while..

williams:

> I deal with top-posters primarily just by ignoring their
> questions [if they can't respect me I shouldn't bother with them].
> That is the method I suggest.

bg:

That's a worthy suggestion, Adam, and I pretty much agree with you.
I will observe that I have converted at least three or four formerly
clueless-newbie top-posters through the means of sitting them down at a
computer and demonstrating how it is intended to be done.
Seeing that light bulb go on over their heads was immensely
satisfying, as you might imagine :-)

Brewster


-- 
***
Embrace a sharing community of sustainable low-carbon diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/killian

[bg]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 08:22, Charles J Killian wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Oh please!
> 
> Piss off!
> 
> The day that how one formats a response to an email is some measure of
> the quality of the individual writing it and the value of that response
> is the day I go back to a yellow pad and pencil.
> 
> Yikes!
> 
> Chuck...

bg:

I guess that means you fall into the "care-less" category.

Up yours.

There are multiple levels of ease of readability in emails,
especially on discussion lists. *You* may be so thick as to have
not noticed, but some of the rest of us see it as making a difference.

Top-posting lacks logic and reflects intellectual laziness.

We don't live out our lives in reverse chronological order - 
why would we want to read an email thread that way?

The worst of it is, doing it right is actually very little
additional effort, if only all of the clueless and care-less
would ever actually try it, and bother to learn a little
something about how their email software works.

Brewster

-- 
***
Embrace a sharing community of sustainable low-carbon justice diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[bg]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 08:12, Ben May wrote:
> I have to say - this thread has given me more laughs than any I've
> gotten from a mailing list since I used to be on the EDM one back in the
> late 90s. Bravo!

bg:

Likewise. I can't believe there are so many people who think you
have to "reconfigure" an email program in order to move the cursor
anywhere you want :-)

Brewster
-- 
***
Embrace a sharing justice community of sustainable low-carbon diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Adam Tauno Williams]

> > yellow pads are not acceptable, only white or off-white will be
> > considered valid forms of communication.
> evolution's yellow-pad-connector crashes too frequently.

Oh, Oh Tomboy integration!  Sweet.

I'm not worried, it will never crash for me.  For whatever reason
[seriously] my systems always seem much more stable than other peoples.


___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Sam Mason]

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 08:42:57AM -0700, David L wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Reid Thompson wrote:
> > yellow pads are not acceptable, only white or off-white will be
> > considered valid forms of communication.
> 
> evolution's yellow-pad-connector crashes too frequently.
> That problem is already fixed in evolution 2.33 which
> hasn't been released, but 2.33 only allows top posting
> or back posting (writing on the back of the yellow pad).

I do hope RFC1149 has been considered, seems like a natural fit but
latency could be a problem.

-- 
  Sam  http://samason.me.uk/
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[David L]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Reid Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:22 -0600, Charles J Killian wrote:

>> The day that how one formats a response to an email is some measure of
>> the quality of the individual writing it and the value of that
>> response
>> is the day I go back to a yellow pad and pencil.
>>
>> Yikes!
>>
>
> yellow pads are not acceptable, only white or off-white will be
> considered valid forms of communication.

evolution's yellow-pad-connector crashes too frequently.
That problem is already fixed in evolution 2.33 which
hasn't been released, but 2.33 only allows top posting
or back posting (writing on the back of the yellow pad).
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Adam Tauno Williams]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 11:28 -0400, Reid Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:22 -0600, Charles J Killian wrote:
> > Oh please!
> > Piss off!
> > The day that how one formats a response to an email is some measure of
> > the quality of the individual writing it and the value of that
> > response
> > is the day I go back to a yellow pad and pencil.
> > Yikes!
> > Chuck... 
> yellow pads are not acceptable, only white or off-white will be
> considered valid forms of communication.

And they much be narrow-ruled, none of that silly wide-ruled stuff.  I
need those extra lines per page.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Reid Thompson]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:22 -0600, Charles J Killian wrote:
> Oh please!
> 
> Piss off!
> 
> The day that how one formats a response to an email is some measure of
> the quality of the individual writing it and the value of that
> response
> is the day I go back to a yellow pad and pencil.
> 
> Yikes!
> 
> Chuck... 

yellow pads are not acceptable, only white or off-white will be
considered valid forms of communication.
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Adam Tauno Williams]

> The way most emailers default in the reply edit mode is to position
> your cursor at the top of the original. The reason this is done
> is apparently, unaccountably, non-obvious to millions of the
> NetNewbies of the past several years. The reason it positions that
> way is to encourage the user to drill down through the original
> post,

While all this is true,  I agree completely, it is utterly pointless to
point it out.  The vast vast majority of people DO NOT CARE about
netiquette (or the convenience of subsequent readers).  Thus you are
wasting bandwidth and every other readers time.  Hashing these things
with people WHO DO NOT CARE is pointless.

I just get sick of seeing pretty much this exact post on different list
several times a day.  Yes, top posting is dumb and bad form - so it
posting that top posting is dumb and bad form.I have been a
UNIX/LINUX admin for almost 20 years - I know a fair amount about this
and that - I deal with top-posters primarily just by ignoring their
questions [if they can't respect me I shouldn't bother with them].  That
is the method I suggest.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[Charles J Killian]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Oh please!

Piss off!

The day that how one formats a response to an email is some measure of
the quality of the individual writing it and the value of that response
is the day I go back to a yellow pad and pencil.

Yikes!

Chuck...

bg wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 07:15, Dave Jewett wrote:
> 
>> I apologize for the top post. Most of the world top posts;
> 
> bg:
> 
> Which simply demonstrates that the world is mostly made up
> of the clueless and care-less.
> 
> dave:
> 
>> and I could not immediate find the section of my email client 
>> to reconfigure it for this specific email.
> 
> "Reconfigure it"???
> 
> What email client are you using that would require reconfiguring
> in order to arrange original and reply in the correct chronological
> sequence? I have used five or six different email clients over the
> past nearly thirty years, and I cannot recall a single one that
> would require "reconfiguration".
> 
> The way most emailers default in the reply edit mode is to position
> your cursor at the top of the original. The reason this is done
> is apparently, unaccountably, non-obvious to millions of the
> NetNewbies of the past several years. The reason it positions that
> way is to encourage the user to drill down through the original
> post, snipping out those portions not directly relevant to their
> intended reply, and not so incidentally reinforcing their knowledge
> of what the original was saying; then having reached the bottom of the
> original, and with any luck at all having reduced it, if it was
> a long one, by say 80%, commence their reply.
> 
> Top posting may be marginally acceptable for a single one-on-one
> exchange in a business environment;
> 
> ---
> "Okay - Mario's on Fourth at 12:45!"
> 
>> "Wanna have lunch tomorrow"
> ---
> 
> even though it reads illogically in that reverse chronology. Fine.
> 
> But top-posting is an irritant on any form of e-list or discussion
> group where there are multi-message threads.
> 
> Yeah, I know, those religious wars again. But I will not
> acquiesce to sloppy, hard-to-read practices just because millions
> of clueless newbies don't know how to work their reply edit function
> as it was intended, and worse, don't much care either way.
> 
> Brewster

- --
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 3944 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len

The Professional version does not have this message
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrOA6AACgkQvo/pZKjjE/PsIwCfaMlVKhZ6Qu7bodOpk3vp517F
tMcAn3b8lOFQ4w7RkY1wTxCrhw0wTJdS
=FRX1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Adam Tauno Williams]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 07:15 -0700, Dave Jewett wrote:
> Bug 550414 has been a problem since 2.24; 

I don't deny there is a problem but something specific is causing it to
manifest for you as I use 2.24 all day every day and have never seen
that error.

Ah!  It is a POP3 and/or Trash bug,  never mind.  I never user either so
it makes sense I'd never see it.

> and is still a problem in 
> 2.27. It is an absolute show stopper, and it has caused me to move off 
> of Evolution.
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=550414
> I apologize for the top post. Most of the world top posts; and I could 
> not immediate find the section of my email client to reconfigure it for 
> this specific email.

Scroll down, click? :)



___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Ben May]

I have to say - this thread has given me more laughs than any I've
gotten from a mailing list since I used to be on the EDM one back in the
late 90s. Bravo!
-  


Benjamin May
Sr. Research Analyst
+(212) 851-4772
ma...@columbia.edu




___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Reid Thompson]

Not sure why you state that this is not allowed
 -- See remainder of post sent via Tbird at bottom.
Dave Jewett wrote:
> Thanks for your feedback.
> 
> I am using Thunderbird.  It has a method to configure for either top or
> bottom post on replies.  But the placement of the configuration option
> is not obvious - and to find the configuration option for this one email
> was way more work than seemed necessary.
> 
I can even post in the middle of the text.
No configuration option changes required.
> Thunderbird's reply feature does not allow a bottom post when configured
> for top post; nor does it allow a top post when configured for bottom post.
> 
> Moving the cursor to the bottom will not work on a Thunderbird reply.
> 
Of course it will -- I just did it.
> - Dave

Response written in thunderbird.  Cursor movement is allowed throughout the 
email.

reid
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Han Pilmeyer]

On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote: 

> I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).


Unfortunately Ubuntu 9.04 uses a quite old version of Evolution 2.26
(namely 2.26.1).

However there are stability issues (as you already mentioned) in
Evolution that are not specific to Ubuntu and which do not appear to
have a satisfactory solution at this time (such as
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=557613)

I share your pain and can only hope this will be better in Ubuntu 9.10
(releasing later this month) with Evolution 2.28. My wife uses
Thunderbird and although that appears to be more stable, it's not
completely without issues either.

--
Han Pilmeyer
pilux_at_pilmeyer_dot_nl
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability/Jewett

[bg]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 07:15, Dave Jewett wrote:

> I apologize for the top post. Most of the world top posts;

bg:

Which simply demonstrates that the world is mostly made up
of the clueless and care-less.

dave:

> and I could not immediate find the section of my email client 
> to reconfigure it for this specific email.

"Reconfigure it"???

What email client are you using that would require reconfiguring
in order to arrange original and reply in the correct chronological
sequence? I have used five or six different email clients over the
past nearly thirty years, and I cannot recall a single one that
would require "reconfiguration".

The way most emailers default in the reply edit mode is to position
your cursor at the top of the original. The reason this is done
is apparently, unaccountably, non-obvious to millions of the
NetNewbies of the past several years. The reason it positions that
way is to encourage the user to drill down through the original
post, snipping out those portions not directly relevant to their
intended reply, and not so incidentally reinforcing their knowledge
of what the original was saying; then having reached the bottom of the
original, and with any luck at all having reduced it, if it was
a long one, by say 80%, commence their reply.

Top posting may be marginally acceptable for a single one-on-one
exchange in a business environment;

---
"Okay - Mario's on Fourth at 12:45!"

>"Wanna have lunch tomorrow"
---

even though it reads illogically in that reverse chronology. Fine.

But top-posting is an irritant on any form of e-list or discussion
group where there are multi-message threads.

Yeah, I know, those religious wars again. But I will not
acquiesce to sloppy, hard-to-read practices just because millions
of clueless newbies don't know how to work their reply edit function
as it was intended, and worse, don't much care either way.

Brewster
-- 
***
Embrace a sharing community of sustainable low-carbon diversity
***
W. Brewster Gillett b...@fdi.usPortland, OR  USA
***
Simply because you don't like to hear it, that doesn't make it untrue.
***

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Reid Thompson]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 07:15 -0700, Dave Jewett wrote:
> I apologize for the top post. Most of the world top posts; and I
> could 
> not immediate find the section of my email client to reconfigure it
> for 
> this specific email. 

The page down or arrow down button should move your cursor to the bottom
of the email.
___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Reid Thompson]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 09:04 -0500, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 07:00 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> > Obviously there is, the Bonobo-free branch was just trunked.  I imagine
> > [don't know] that such infrastructure work consumed a fair amount of
> > resources.
> 
> It did: a full year, off and on.
> 
> Also, we've suffered a significant loss of manpower -- and with it,
> knowledge -- over the past year.  So in general things are taking a
> little longer to fix as the remaining developers try to fill in the
> gaps.  The state of virtual folders is a particularly sore spot.
> 
> That said, the project is alive and well and in many ways healthier than
> ever.
> 
> Matthew Barnes

git branch gnome-2-28 has been quite stable and working very well for
me.  the recent backend changes did cause some discomfort, but the
issues that affected me the most seem to have been addressed.  I realize
that running from SCM is not the norm for most folks, but would hope
that the next distribution update including gnome-2.28 would remedy the
biggest issues.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 10:07 -0400, B. Joshua Rosen wrote:
> Version 2.22 crashes once a day on Fedora 9, it's not just an Ubuntu
> problem. 

[Once again: please don't top-post on this list]

Maybe you should update Fedora. You do realize that F9 is no longer
supported don't you? I use Evo 2.26.3 on F11 and while it's not
problem-free I'm not seeing the level of breakage you claim.

poc

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Dave Jewett]

Bug 550414 has been a problem since 2.24; and is still a problem in 
2.27. It is an absolute show stopper, and it has caused me to move off 
of Evolution.


https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=550414

I apologize for the top post. Most of the world top posts; and I could 
not immediate find the section of my email client to reconfigure it for 
this specific email.


- Dave



Philipp Kubina wrote:

I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not the
only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can not
understand how this can be considered a stable release.
When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
filing bug reports to help debugging)
Philipp

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

  

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[B. Joshua Rosen]

Version 2.22 crashes once a day on Fedora 9, it's not just an Ubuntu
problem. 
On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 10:00 -0400, Derek McDaniel wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: evolution-list-boun...@gnome.org
> [mailto:evolution-list-boun...@gnome.org]on Behalf Of B. Joshua Rosen
> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:56 AM
> To: Chenthill
> Cc: evolution-list
> Subject: Re: [Evolution] stability
> 
> 
> I hope the vfolders fix is a priority, it's a complete show stopper for
> any user who has a large number of stored messages. When can we expect a
> fix?
> 
> Josh
> 
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 12:09 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 00:54 -0400, B. Joshua Rosen wrote:
> > > Evolution has been essentially unusable for almost a year. I'm still on
> > > Fedora 9 because it has Evolution 2.22 which is the last working
> > > release, they wemt to SQLite after that which completely broke the
> > > virtual folders.
> 
> I think it is a problem with Ubuntu. I have only had stability problems with
> Ubuntu and Evolution (Crashes quite a few times a day). I had to switch over
> to Thunderbird because of the stability problems.
> 
> > > Are there any developers still working on Evolution? I can't understand
> > > how it could be so completely broken for so long unless it's been
> > > abandoned.
> 
> http://www.go-evolution.org/Evo2.26 - Shows the new plans I believe and
> shows that its still in development.
> 
> > There vfolder issues unfortunately have not been handled well enough. We
> > will be working on the same for 2.29.x -
> > http://go-evolution.org/Evo3.0 and relevant fixes will be ported to
> > gnome-2-28 branch .
> >
> >
> > - Chenthill.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> > > > I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> > > > 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> > > > Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not
> the
> > > > only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can
> not
> > > > understand how this can be considered a stable release.
> > > > When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
> > > > filing bug reports to help debugging)
> > > > Philipp
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Evolution-list mailing list
> > > > Evolution-list@gnome.org
> > > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
> >
> >
> >
> --
> B. Joshua Rosen, VP
> Polybus Systems Corp
> 23 Providence Rd
> Westford, MA 01886
> Phone: (978) 692-4828
> Cell: (978) 828-0944
> FAX: (978) 692-7557
> 
> ___
> Evolution-list mailing list
> Evolution-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
> 
> __ NOD32 4490 (20091008) Information __
> 
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
-- 
B. Joshua Rosen, VP
Polybus Systems Corp
23 Providence Rd
Westford, MA 01886
Phone: (978) 692-4828
Cell: (978) 828-0944
FAX: (978) 692-7557

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Matthew Barnes]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 07:00 -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> Obviously there is, the Bonobo-free branch was just trunked.  I imagine
> [don't know] that such infrastructure work consumed a fair amount of
> resources.

It did: a full year, off and on.

Also, we've suffered a significant loss of manpower -- and with it,
knowledge -- over the past year.  So in general things are taking a
little longer to fix as the remaining developers try to fill in the
gaps.  The state of virtual folders is a particularly sore spot.

That said, the project is alive and well and in many ways healthier than
ever.

Matthew Barnes

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Derek McDaniel]

-Original Message-
From: evolution-list-boun...@gnome.org
[mailto:evolution-list-boun...@gnome.org]on Behalf Of B. Joshua Rosen
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:56 AM
To: Chenthill
Cc: evolution-list
Subject: Re: [Evolution] stability


I hope the vfolders fix is a priority, it's a complete show stopper for
any user who has a large number of stored messages. When can we expect a
fix?

Josh

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 12:09 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 00:54 -0400, B. Joshua Rosen wrote:
> > Evolution has been essentially unusable for almost a year. I'm still on
> > Fedora 9 because it has Evolution 2.22 which is the last working
> > release, they wemt to SQLite after that which completely broke the
> > virtual folders.

I think it is a problem with Ubuntu. I have only had stability problems with
Ubuntu and Evolution (Crashes quite a few times a day). I had to switch over
to Thunderbird because of the stability problems.

> > Are there any developers still working on Evolution? I can't understand
> > how it could be so completely broken for so long unless it's been
> > abandoned.

http://www.go-evolution.org/Evo2.26 - Shows the new plans I believe and
shows that its still in development.

> There vfolder issues unfortunately have not been handled well enough. We
> will be working on the same for 2.29.x -
> http://go-evolution.org/Evo3.0 and relevant fixes will be ported to
> gnome-2-28 branch .
>
>
> - Chenthill.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> > > I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> > > 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> > > Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not
the
> > > only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can
not
> > > understand how this can be considered a stable release.
> > > When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
> > > filing bug reports to help debugging)
> > > Philipp
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Evolution-list mailing list
> > > Evolution-list@gnome.org
> > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
>
>
>
--
B. Joshua Rosen, VP
Polybus Systems Corp
23 Providence Rd
Westford, MA 01886
Phone: (978) 692-4828
Cell: (978) 828-0944
FAX: (978) 692-7557

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

__ NOD32 4490 (20091008) Information __

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com


___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[B. Joshua Rosen]

I hope the vfolders fix is a priority, it's a complete show stopper for
any user who has a large number of stored messages. When can we expect a
fix?

Josh

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 12:09 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 00:54 -0400, B. Joshua Rosen wrote:
> > Evolution has been essentially unusable for almost a year. I'm still on
> > Fedora 9 because it has Evolution 2.22 which is the last working
> > release, they wemt to SQLite after that which completely broke the
> > virtual folders. 
> > 
> > Are there any developers still working on Evolution? I can't understand
> > how it could be so completely broken for so long unless it's been
> > abandoned.
> There vfolder issues unfortunately have not been handled well enough. We
> will be working on the same for 2.29.x -
> http://go-evolution.org/Evo3.0 and relevant fixes will be ported to
> gnome-2-28 branch .
> 
> 
> - Chenthill.
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> > > I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> > > 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> > > Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not the
> > > only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can not
> > > understand how this can be considered a stable release.
> > > When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
> > > filing bug reports to help debugging)
> > > Philipp
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > Evolution-list mailing list
> > > Evolution-list@gnome.org
> > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
> 
> 
> 
-- 
B. Joshua Rosen, VP
Polybus Systems Corp
23 Providence Rd
Westford, MA 01886
Phone: (978) 692-4828
Cell: (978) 828-0944
FAX: (978) 692-7557

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Sylvia Sánchez]

El mié, 07-10-2009 a las 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina escribió:

> I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not the
> only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can not
> understand how this can be considered a stable release.
> When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
> filing bug reports to help debugging)
> Philipp
> 
> ___


I'm using Evolution 2.22 in Debian and is pretty stable.  Never crash,
always works.  May be is Ubuntu and not Evolution problem.


Regards
Sylvia


___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Adam Tauno Williams]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 00:54 -0400, B. Joshua Rosen wrote:
> Evolution has been essentially unusable for almost a year. I'm still on
> Fedora 9 because it has Evolution 2.22 which is the last working
> release, they wemt to SQLite after that which completely broke the
> virtual folders. 

I'm using Evolution 2.24 on openSUSE 11.1 all day every day.  It has
been extremely stable and performance is very good.

> Are there any developers still working on Evolution? I can't understand
> how it could be so completely broken for so long unless it's been
> abandoned.

Obviously there is, the Bonobo-free branch was just trunked.  I imagine
[don't know] that such infrastructure work consumed a fair amount of
resources.  Sometimes backends require love before the front-ends can
advance,  only end-users don't see any of that;  although in the end
they reap the rewards when the front-end [appears to] suddenly surge
forward.  GNOME 3.0 will be Bonobo free with all resources accessible
via the beatific D-Bus.

> On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> > I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> > 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> > Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not the
> > only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can not
> > understand how this can be considered a stable release.
> > When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
> > filing bug reports to help debugging)
> > Philipp

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Chenthill]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 00:54 -0400, B. Joshua Rosen wrote:
> Evolution has been essentially unusable for almost a year. I'm still on
> Fedora 9 because it has Evolution 2.22 which is the last working
> release, they wemt to SQLite after that which completely broke the
> virtual folders. 
> 
> Are there any developers still working on Evolution? I can't understand
> how it could be so completely broken for so long unless it's been
> abandoned.
There vfolder issues unfortunately have not been handled well enough. We
will be working on the same for 2.29.x -
http://go-evolution.org/Evo3.0 and relevant fixes will be ported to
gnome-2-28 branch .


- Chenthill.
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> > I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> > 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> > Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not the
> > only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can not
> > understand how this can be considered a stable release.
> > When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
> > filing bug reports to help debugging)
> > Philipp
> > 
> > ___
> > Evolution-list mailing list
> > Evolution-list@gnome.org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list



___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[Ng Oon-Ee]

On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 00:54 -0400, B. Joshua Rosen wrote:
> Evolution has been essentially unusable for almost a year. I'm still on
> Fedora 9 because it has Evolution 2.22 which is the last working
> release, they wemt to SQLite after that which completely broke the
> virtual folders. 
> 
> Are there any developers still working on Evolution? I can't understand
> how it could be so completely broken for so long unless it's been
> abandoned.

First, please don't top-post.

Secondly, I've been using evolution's latest versions and haven't had
stability problems. It may be broken for you, but that doesn't indicate
a general breakage for every user.

This thread is going nowhere.

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list

Re: [Evolution] stability

[B. Joshua Rosen]

Evolution has been essentially unusable for almost a year. I'm still on
Fedora 9 because it has Evolution 2.22 which is the last working
release, they wemt to SQLite after that which completely broke the
virtual folders. 

Are there any developers still working on Evolution? I can't understand
how it could be so completely broken for so long unless it's been
abandoned.


On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 09:28 +, Philipp Kubina wrote:
> I am working with Evolution for a month now (Ubuntu 9.04, Evolution
> 2.26.1) and the instability is terrible (multiple crashes every day).
> Looking at the bug reports from other users I can see that I am not the
> only one having problems with evolution's stability. Honestly I can not
> understand how this can be considered a stable release.
> When is Evolutions stability going to be improved? (Of course I am
> filing bug reports to help debugging)
> Philipp
> 
> ___
> Evolution-list mailing list
> Evolution-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
-- 
B. Joshua Rosen, VP
Polybus Systems Corp
23 Providence Rd
Westford, MA 01886
Phone: (978) 692-4828
Cell: (978) 828-0944
FAX: (978) 692-7557

___
Evolution-list mailing list
Evolution-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list