Re: New implementation of EMsgPort
Matthew Barnes <[email protected]> Tue, 17 Oct 2006 07:59:29 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gnome.evolution.patches |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 2006-10-17 at 13:38 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote: > I'm interested in changes like yours. Not because I want to make things > more unstable (less tested) for tinymail ;), but because I believe some > inner core parts of Camel have design problems and others are > replaceable with excellent existing implementations in glib (like > EMsgPort <-> GAsyncQueue, EMutex <-> GMutex, GThread <-> EThread and > finally of course CamelObject <-> GObject). Sounds good. Speaking of which, see also: Kill EMutex (with patches): http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=356177 Kill EThread (with patches): http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362638 Kill CamelException (no patches yet): http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=354075 I'd be very interested in seeing Camel become GObject-based. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help. Matt _______________________________________________ Evolution-patches mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-patches