Re: [RFC] replace iCalendar code by libical

On 2019.12.09 21:01, andré via balsa-list wrote:
> Le 19-12-08 à 20 h 43, Peter Bloomfield a écrit :
>> Hi Albrecht:
>> 
>> On 12/08/2019 09:02:37 AM Sun, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> Balsa has some limited support for dealing with text/calendar  
>>> parts, typically containing appointment (VEVENT) requests to which  
>>> the user can reply.  IIRC, I wrote the code more than ~10 years  
>>> ago, according to a subset of the definitions from RFC 2445 and  
>>> 2446 which meanwhile have been replaced by RFC 5545 and 5546.
>>> 
>>> I now noticed that the old code is not able to deal with  
>>> text/calendar parts created by M$ Exchange properly any more.
>>> 
>>> As a possible improvement, the libical library [1] claims to be  
>>> able to deal with RFC 5545 and 5546 compliant items.  Therefore,  
>>> instead of re-inventing the wheel (i.e. fix or re-write the /very/  
>>> old Balsa code), I propose to use this library instead.
>>> 
>>> Before investing time into a migration, I would be interested in  
>>> your opinion:
>>> 
>>> Is it acceptable to add an additional dependency on a (though  
>>> somewhat standard) library?
>>> And should we make it mandatory or not (in the latter case,  
>>> text/calendar parts would be displayed and printed like text/plain,  
>>> which is usually confusing)?
>>> 
>>> Opinions?
>>> 
>>> Best, Albrecht.
>>> 
>>> [1] <https://github.com/libical/libical>
>> 
>> The added dependency isn't an issue for a GNOME user, as libical is  
>> required by much of the desktop, and it looks like an easy install  
>> on any other distro that doesn't have it as an integral part. So I'd  
>> be in favor of making it mandatory; others should feel free to  
>> disagree.
>> 
>> I have no idea about the effort involved in the migration, but if it  
>> simplifies the code it would be good. Let me know if I can help!
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Peter
>> 
> 
> I use the MATE desktop (based on Gnome 2), and although it isn't  
> required by any application, it must be suggested, since it is  
> installed.
> It is very small, so there shouldn't be any problem making it  
> required by Balsa.
> 
> André

I'm on a primarily KDE system, and already have a half dozen other apps  
pulling in libical, so I'd say go for it.

Jack