Le vendredi 05 mars 2010 à 08:41 -0500, Paul Smith a écrit : > However, I don't see any problems and I've been building Evo 2.29.x > from the latest git source every few days and using it "in anger" on > all of my systems for daily email (and I get/send a LOT of email), > with both IMAP and MAPI, for the last 3 months or so. It works MUCH > better than 2.28.
(Replying to this email since the reply was not only on the listed and landed in a box where I deleted it) > Sorry, but that's wrong: 2.28 is unquestionably broken. Let's say not everybody shares your view on that but put in context you rather seem to suggest that mapi in 2.28 is broken right? > The Exchange MAPI support simply does not work, except maybe for the > most trivial cases. Color me unimpressed with statements to the > contrary Nobody stated the contrary. The evolution-mapi version 2.29 probably works much better seeing the issues which have been raised on 2.28 but evolution-mapi is neither installed by default in Ubuntu nor officially supported and we can't trade the stability of the default email client for the vast majority of users for better exchange support. > Have the Ubuntu devs actually tried using the new version? Have they > run into problems? Has anyone on the Ubuntu team contacted the Evo > developer's lists to ask their opinion and discuss the stability with > other users of 2.29.x? No we didn't try 2.29, it has been decided in the start at UDS that we would stay on the stable version. We do talked to upstream regularly though, join often their weekly meeting and chat on their IRC channel. Nobody in the upstream team discussed our decisions and most of the upstream hackers agreed that evolution is not a trivial piece of code and that stabilizing the new version which all the infrastructure changes will be challenging and leading probably to a 2.30 version which will need some work still. Ubuntu has been bitten by upgrading to new versions which were rewritten in the past and we have learnt, the decision has been made to stay on a version which is not perfect but that we know about rather running to use a rewrite in the risk of being stucked with something not ready quality and feature wise for a lts. Note also that tracking such a rewrite requires to commit ressources to track the updates, refactore the packaging, track the bug and work with upstream to make sure those get fixed on a regular basis and that the current Ubuntu team is quite busy already so we prefer to dedicate ressources to improve what we have now. > Is the decision based on anything more concrete than reading the roadmap? Yes, on experience from people packaging this software for years and tracking its bug, on discussion with the community at UDS and on discussions with the people writting the software. None of those feeling comfortable saying that 2.30 will be for sure stable enough to be used in distribution where users expect stability rather than the newest versions. There is no perfect solution and either ways some users will be unhappy, if your real issue is the mapi support why don't we try to see what we can do about this one? And in any case there will be most likely a ppa which will have evolution 2.30 builds for lucid that you will be able to use if you want to try that version or a better mapi support. > Let's be honest. No one is going to follow the RHEL packaging of Gnome > 2.28 and be porting Evolution fixes into the Ubuntu repository. Ditto > for Debian. And certainly the Gnome devs won't be making new releases On what do you base those comments? In fact upstream just roll 2.28.3 less than a week ago and agreed to keep commiting changes to gnome-2-28 git when it makes sense to make collaboration between the distributions which will stay on those versions for a while easier. We do often look to fixes from other distributions too and lts versions do get new versions of GNOME usually too. -- -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
