Re: Camel in evolution-data-server, a different proposal
Philip Van Hoof <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gnome.evolution.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 11:35 +0100, Ross Burton wrote: > On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 12:25 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: > > I wasn't (am no longer) proposing to move "camel/" out of e-d-s. I was > > proposing to put a configure.ac file in its directory. Moving Camel out > > of evolution-data-server/ is not the scope nor point of this thread. > > For what purpose? Camel depends on libedataserver. Being a developer, I can probably fix that chicken and egg problem in a few hacking evenings. > So you've found a problem with the Red Hat packaging, in that it treats > all of EDS a single library. File a bug with Red Hat, and notice that > Debian, Maemo, and OpenEmbedded (at least) already have split EDS > packages. I very much applaud what OpenEmbedded, Maemo, OpenedHand and Debian did in terms of packaging. It's indeed the right way. > In the scheme of things this is a very minor issue which effects very > few people. I'd prefer to see effort spent on fixing bugs and memory > leaks. I agree it's a minor issue. But things can happen in parallel. This is why people developed round robin algorithms in schedulers :). Else the minor ones or very-low-priority ones never get any attention from the processing unit (because the large ones eat up exactly 100% of the processing units time). However, I do agree that we are putting to much of a discussion/fight on it. It should probably simply be a patch and a get-it-over-with commit. ps. Is there a beach at the Boston Summit? Maybe we can do a beach-fight about it? :-) (ps. I'm not yet sure if I will attent the summit). -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be