Re: [Evolution] Trying to configure evo-mapi
Dnia 2009-02-23, pon o godzinie 11:43 +0100, William John Murray pisze: > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 10:34 +0100, Patryk Benderz wrote: > > [cut] > > >Any ideas? > > only one: you should use Evolution packages from Rawhide. > > > Hi Patryk, > I don't see it in rawhide. e.g.: > http://mirrors.ircam.fr/pub/fedora/linux/development/i386/os/Packages/ > Am I looking in the wrong place? The place is fine. Take a deeper look. I found package called evolution-2.25.91-1.fc11.i386.rpm which looks like beta before 2.26 AFAIK Rawhide is unstable version of fedora. Since Matthew Barnes wrote explicitly on his page http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/ , that his MAPI packages "requires the Evolution packages from Rawhide", thus you probably should use evo 2.25.something.minor. -- Kind Regards Patryk "LeadMan" Benderz IT Specialist Linux Registered User #377521 () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evaluating Evolution- some basic questions [about the forced hyphens in signatures]
[cut] > Please do not make Evo more Outlook-like. It is bad enough that I have to use > the stupid mail client on ths phone. At least I can use a sane client on my > work desktop. totally agree, lets keep Evo sane and RFC compliant. [cut] -- Kind Regards Patryk "LeadMan" Benderz IT Specialist Linux Registered User #377521 () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Trying to configure evo-mapi
Dnia 2009-02-23, pon o godzinie 18:42 +0100, William John Murray pisze: > > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 15:35 +0100, Patryk Benderz wrote: > > Dnia 2009-02-23, pon o godzinie 11:43 +0100, William John Murray pisze: > > > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 10:34 +0100, Patryk Benderz wrote: > > > > [cut] > > > > >Any ideas? > > > > only one: you should use Evolution packages from Rawhide. > > > > > > > Hi Patryk, > > > I don't see it in rawhide. e.g.: > > > http://mirrors.ircam.fr/pub/fedora/linux/development/i386/os/Packages/ > > > Am I looking in the wrong place? > > The place is fine. Take a deeper look. I found package called > > evolution-2.25.91-1.fc11.i386.rpm which looks like beta before 2.26 > > AFAIK Rawhide is unstable version of fedora. Since Matthew Barnes wrote > > explicitly on his page http://mbarnes.fedorapeople.org/ , that his MAPI > > packages "requires the Evolution packages from Rawhide", thus you > > probably should use evo 2.25.something.minor. > > > Ach, I misunderstood. I tried to configure it from a rawhide machine, > and that did not work. So then I went to F10 - which install but doesn'y > run. But F10 plus 472MB from 'yum update evolution --enablerepo=rawhide' > is working, at least at some level! > Thank you very much, No problem. BTW, i have never used fedora ;) -- Kind Regards Patryk "LeadMan" Benderz IT Specialist Linux Registered User #377521 () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] how to configure http proxy to forward mail
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 15:05 +0800, Daniel.Li wrote: > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 23:52 -0700, Prasad Kandepu wrote: > > In Evolution 2.24.x, you can do this by configuring Proxy settings in > > Edit->Preferences->Network Preferences. Or Evolution also obeys system > > proxy settings. > > Humm... I'm using 2.24.3. I have set both NM and Network Preferences in > Evolution. And it seems still doesn't work. > > Did I miss something? Hi, maybe not. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=555888 Will be included in 2.26.0, though. Bye, Milan ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] how to configure http proxy to forward mail
A. On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 10:20 +0100, Milan Crha wrote: > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 15:05 +0800, Daniel.Li wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 23:52 -0700, Prasad Kandepu wrote: > > > In Evolution 2.24.x, you can do this by configuring Proxy settings in > > > Edit->Preferences->Network Preferences. Or Evolution also obeys system > > > proxy settings. > > > > Humm... I'm using 2.24.3. I have set both NM and Network Preferences in > > Evolution. And it seems still doesn't work. > > > > Did I miss something? > > Hi, > maybe not. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=555888 > Will be included in 2.26.0, though. Thanks, I can't wait to see 2.26.0 release. Common fellows, I have seen 2.25.91 unstable version. :) Hope to hear the good news soon:) > Bye, > Milan > > ___ > Evolution-list mailing list > Evolution-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list -- Daniel ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] how to configure http proxy to forward mail
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 17:59 +0800, Daniel.Li wrote: > Thanks, I can't wait to see 2.26.0 release. Common fellows, I have > seen > 2.25.91 unstable version. :) Come on, fellows. Sorry about typo :( > > Hope to hear the good news soon:) -- Daniel ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evo 2.24.3 bug list, by personal priority.
> > ... in other words, the RFC itself says that if the separator exists you > should honour it, and it's saying that it's a convention for usenet and > Internet mail, but at no point does it say that it applies to all > private internal communications and that you must use it for all > signatures in private internal communications. Forcibly inserting DASH > DASH SPACE into private internal emails is not something that the RFC > attempts to enforce (as far as I can tell), yet that is the very > behaviour that Evolution is forcing, which is not something which is > covered by the RFC in question. > > Disclosure: I am assuming here that "Internet mail" refers mostly to > "public mailing lists", because that is the only context for mail on the > Internet in which I have observed "-- " as "commonly appearing". I don't think I agree that "Internet mail" is just mailing lists - most, if not all, the mail I send and receive is "Internet mail" - not everyone works in a corporate environment you know! There's things like personal mail, academic communities, developer/FOSS communities and so on. BTW - much as I hate to point out a way around inserting the delimiter, you can do it using a script signature. Just remember that the script needs to output HTML even if you use plain text email - and please, start the script with "-- ". P. ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] seeking dual boot evolution config "example"
I will let others with a greater understanding of the differences between the windows an linux data structure provide a simpler answer if there is one. If not, you could try running a local imap server which fetches your mail, and then point the various mail clients that you want to use at the local imap. Of course, if your mail provider offers imap or exchange, you needn't need to do anything special as the mail folders stay on the host and can be accessed from either partition. -- Art Alexion MIS/Central Office Support Resources for Human Development - Original Message - From: evolution-list-boun...@gnome.org To: evolution-list@gnome.org Sent: Mon Feb 23 22:20:20 2009 Subject: [Evolution] seeking dual boot evolution config "example" I would like to use Evolution from both Ubuntu Hardy and from Win-XP in a dual boot situation. Has anyone done this config and know how to make things work so that there is one, shared copy of email and folders and setting etc? If I can't have exactly one copy of files that is shared, has someone worked out how to rsync or similar a minimal set of items so that it feels as if there is one copy? Thanks, ~~~ 0;-D ___ 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] Evo 2.24.3 bug list, by personal priority.
I agree with Pete. Internet mail, at minimum, means ALL mail outside your localhost or LAN. In that context, it may simply be a synonym for what we have come to call email. Outside of work, we send a lot of mail to friends and family that has nothing to do with a list. Moreover, the architect/client conversations you use in your example is not "internal" unless the clients of the architects are co-workers on the sam LAN. -- Art Alexion MIS/Central Office Support Resources for Human Development - Original Message - From: evolution-list-boun...@gnome.org To: evolution-list@gnome.org Sent: Tue Feb 24 05:17:18 2009 Subject: Re: [Evolution] Evo 2.24.3 bug list, by personal priority. > > ... in other words, the RFC itself says that if the separator exists you > should honour it, and it's saying that it's a convention for usenet and > Internet mail, but at no point does it say that it applies to all > private internal communications and that you must use it for all > signatures in private internal communications. Forcibly inserting DASH > DASH SPACE into private internal emails is not something that the RFC > attempts to enforce (as far as I can tell), yet that is the very > behaviour that Evolution is forcing, which is not something which is > covered by the RFC in question. > > Disclosure: I am assuming here that "Internet mail" refers mostly to > "public mailing lists", because that is the only context for mail on the > Internet in which I have observed "-- " as "commonly appearing". I don't think I agree that "Internet mail" is just mailing lists - most, if not all, the mail I send and receive is "Internet mail" - not everyone works in a corporate environment you know! There's things like personal mail, academic communities, developer/FOSS communities and so on. BTW - much as I hate to point out a way around inserting the delimiter, you can do it using a script signature. Just remember that the script needs to output HTML even if you use plain text email - and please, start the script with "-- ". P. ___ 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] how to configure http proxy to forward mail
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:01 +0800, Daniel.Li wrote: > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 17:59 +0800, Daniel.Li wrote: > > Thanks, I can't wait to see 2.26.0 release. Common fellows, I have > > seen 2.25.91 unstable version. :) > > Come on, fellows. Sorry about typo :( > > > > Hope to hear the good news soon:) http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointTwentyfive ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evo 2.24.3 bug list, by personal priority.
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 07:37 -0500, Art Alexion wrote: > I agree with Pete. Internet mail, at minimum, means ALL mail outside > your localhost or LAN. In that context, it may simply be a synonym > for what we have come to call email. I think this is true. At the time the RFC was written, there were several non-Internet large-scale networks around, hard though that may be to believe nowadays. Bitnet was one I remember (I won't describe how it worked for fear of upsetting those of a sensitive nature :-) poc ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] how to configure http proxy to forward mail
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 08:16 -0500, Paul Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 18:01 +0800, Daniel.Li wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 17:59 +0800, Daniel.Li wrote: > > > Thanks, I can't wait to see 2.26.0 release. Common fellows, I have > > > seen 2.25.91 unstable version. :) > > > > Come on, fellows. Sorry about typo :( > > > > > > Hope to hear the good news soon:) > > http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointTwentyfive Yeah, I got it. Thanks. Mar 18 GNOME 2.26.0 Final release! (Schedule) -- Daniel ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evo 2.24.3 bug list, by personal priority.
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 08:53 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 07:37 -0500, Art Alexion wrote: > > I agree with Pete. Internet mail, at minimum, means ALL mail outside > > your localhost or LAN. In that context, it may simply be a synonym > > for what we have come to call email. > > I think this is true. At the time the RFC was written, there were > several non-Internet large-scale networks around, hard though that may > be to believe nowadays. Bitnet was one I remember (I won't describe > how > it worked for fear of upsetting those of a sensitive nature :-) AOL, and don't forget Compuserve and Prodigy, the latter of which, if I recall correctly, was originally a Sears & Robuck product. -- Art Alexion MIS x3075 ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evaluating Evolution- some basic questions [about the forced hyphens in signatures]
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 13:11 +1100, Nick Jenkins wrote: > > Second, note the one hyphen in my signature above the longer series > > below? I can't get rid of that "hovering hyphen." I've edited my > > signature, of course, but that hovering hyphen doesn't appear there. > > How can I get rid of that? I have a simple method of avoiding the hyphen issue that others might find useful: I don't use the signature feature of evolution. Instead, I have a selection of various signature files (like the one below) in my home directory. To add a signature to a mail I am composing, I use the "Insert" button and insert the signature as a text file (I never send html mail). Then the software doesn't know it is a signature, but the recipient sees it as such. Of course, this might take too long if you send dozens of emails every day. George Reeke, Ph.D. Head, Laboratory of Biological Modelling The Rockefeller University 1230 York Avenue New York, NY 10065 phone: (212)-327-7627 email: re...@rockefeller.edu ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evaluating Evolution- some basic questions [about the forced hyphens in signatures]
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 10:45 -0500, George Reeke wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 13:11 +1100, Nick Jenkins wrote: > > > Second, note the one hyphen in my signature above the longer > series > > > below? I can't get rid of that "hovering hyphen." I've edited my > > > signature, of course, but that hovering hyphen doesn't appear > there. > > > How can I get rid of that? > > I have a simple method of avoiding the hyphen issue that others might > find useful: I don't use the signature feature of evolution. > Instead, I have a selection of various signature files (like the > one below) in my home directory. To add a signature to a mail > I am composing, I use the "Insert" button and insert the signature > as a text file (I never send html mail). Then the software doesn't > know it is a signature, but the recipient sees it as such. > Of course, this might take too long if you send dozens of emails > every day. > > George Reeke, Ph.D. > Head, Laboratory of Biological Modelling > The Rockefeller University > 1230 York Avenue > New York, NY 10065 I'm really trying to understand what is so objectionable about the hyphens for some people. I don't really understand. I intentionally quoted Dr. Reeke's signature above to illustrate. I don't like the fact that it isn't separated from the other paragraphs in the email. I find it mildly disconcerting as such. Even traditional paper letters set off signatures from the body of the correspondence with a close. like "sincerely yours", and usually a bit of extra white space. Often indented as well. I don't mean to tell people how to write THEIR correspondence, but I'm really not getting what the problem is, especially because I find the hyphens (1) unobtrusive, (2) useful in delimiters between the correspondence body and the often superfluous signature, (3) standards compliant, and (3) a good way to automatically trim redundant information. -- Art Alexion Resources for Human Development, Inc. 215-951-0300 x3075 4700 Wissahickon Ave. a...@rhd.org Philadelphia, PA 19144 267-615-3172 ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evaluating Evolution- some basic questions [about the forced hyphens in signatures]
> > > > I have a simple method of avoiding the hyphen issue that others might > > find useful: I don't use the signature feature of evolution. > > Instead, I have a selection of various signature files (like the > > one below) in my home directory. To add a signature to a mail > > I am composing, I use the "Insert" button and insert the signature > > as a text file (I never send html mail). Then the software doesn't > > know it is a signature, but the recipient sees it as such. But that's the whole point - with the "-- " the software DOES know it's a sig and can then strip it out when necessary ... but that all breaks down when people top post and put their sig after their own text and before the included text - then they whinge that it's stripped everything out. > > I'm really trying to understand what is so objectionable about the > hyphens for some people. I don't really understand. > > I intentionally quoted Dr. Reeke's signature above to illustrate. And your sig was removed by Evo when I replied - good 'ol Evo. > I don't mean to tell people how to write THEIR correspondence, but I'm > really not getting what the problem is, especially because I find the > hyphens (1) unobtrusive, (2) useful in delimiters between the > correspondence body and the often superfluous signature, (3) standards > compliant, and (3) a good way to automatically trim redundant > information. > And then you get people who rather than put an unobtrusive couple of hyphens they put a row of "*" or "=" or "_". Also, wasn't there some guideline in the dim and distant past about sigs only being 4 lines long? P. ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evaluating Evolution- some basic questions [about the forced hyphens in signatures]
On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 11:21 -0500, Pete Biggs wrote: > Also, wasn't there some guideline in the dim and distant past about > sigs > only being 4 lines long? I like the big disclaimer/warning paragraph, written by some computer-clueless lawyer, that tells you that if you aren't the intended recipient to not read the email and to delete it. That one is often longer than the message itself, and being at the bottom isn't read until after you have read the misaddressed message. Honest and innocent people probably deleted it before they even got that far (because they don't care) and nefarious people will ignore it anyway. It is like asking if a terrorist packed your bags for you. -- Art Alexion Resources for Human Development, Inc. 215-951-0300 x3075 4700 Wissahickon Ave. a...@rhd.org Philadelphia, PA 19144 267-615-3172 ___ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
Re: [Evolution] Evaluating Evolution- some basic questions [about the forced hyphens in signatures]
> I'm really trying to understand what is so objectionable about the > hyphens for some people. I don't really understand. Let me answer your request for explanation with a completely fictitious story - an off-line corollary, if you will - to explain why it's objectionable to me. Indulge me. Suppose there's another inhabited planet, far far away, called "Dirt". Dirt is eerily similar to ours in most respects, including language, culture, and technology - but with a few small differences. For example, on Dirt there is a group of respected English-language academics, who regularly meet. They call themselves the ERFC - the "English Rules Formation Committee". When this committee meets, it usually focuses on matters of concern only to academics - such as what size font should be standard for English-language academic papers, how wide margins should be on those papers (14 millimetres or 15: it's a much-debated question), whether the Dewey-decimal system should be used for filing in English language libraries, and so forth. Generally the ERFC sticks to matters that only academics could care about ... such that outside of academic circles, the rest of Dirt's citizens are largely unaware of the ERFC, and pay no attention to them. This situation worked well enough for all concerned, until one day in 2004, when the ERFC meets, and in subsection 4.3 of edict number 3676, a small item is included. This item states that any letter "i" in a person's signature must not have a dot / point above the "i", and that instead it had to be one of those little cutesy small circles that you sometimes see above the letter "i" - so a little 'o' above the 'i' was now the only acceptable form of the letter "i" in a signature, by official ERFC edict. The rest of Dirt's citizens yawned. They were used to ignoring the ERFC, and the ERFC had no official jurisdiction over them, and ERFC had issued edicts before that had been safely ignored (that all mail must be transported by carrier pigeon being one humorous example). Besides, the general population comprised 99% of the users of signatures, and academics only 1%. In academic circles however, it had been the fashion to include a cutesy o above the i for some time now, and the last few academic holdouts rapidly changed their signatures following the ERFC edict, lest they be seen as Luddites. For just as in other groups, academics were followers of fashion, and no academic wanted to be seen as unfashionable, lest it hurt their chances of getting funded come grant time or cause them to be ridiculed by their peers. Furthermore, as on our world, the academics mostly communicated with other academics, and they also somewhat overestimated their own importance and were certain that their way was the right way. Taken together, these factors produced two distinct signature "cultures": an i-with-a-cutesy-o-above-it in the signature (common in academia and with English language technicians), and a normal i in the signature (as used by everybody else). Now there was one other difference between Dirt and our world, and that was the focus of technological innovation. Unlike our world, the focus of technological innovation on Dirt was on pens. That's right: pens, the things you write with. But not the cheap Biros of our world, oh no. To a Dirtian, that would be a relic of the old way of doing things, much as we might view an abacus as an interesting toy, but no comparison to a spreadsheet. And Dirt's pens truly were extraordinary, with the things they could do. You could write a word, misspell it, and it would beep, and if you squeezed the pen in just the right way, it would go back and auto-correct the word so that it was now spelled correctly. The pen also remembered everything you had written, so if you repeatedly used a word outside of the common dictionary, it would learn that word, and would no longer beep every time you used it. If you were addressing a letter, it would search through all the previous addresses you had written, and it would auto-complete the rest of the address once you had written enough letters, thus saving you lots of manual writing. And if you were on holiday, you could write one postcard, and then it would remember that, and then you could put the pen above all your other postcards, and it would fill them in with the same message, thus saving you having to write them out. And if you were at a party, and you met a cute girl, she could write out her phone number with your pen in the air, and it would remember that phone number for later. Yes, the people of Dirt truly loved their pens, and people became very fussy about their personal preference in pens, and got quite upset if they ever lost their pen. Of course with this love of pens, it required many pen makers, each with different models with different strengths and weaknesses. There was the "PenSoft" company, with their top-selling "PenLook" model (this pen was seen as having lots of features, but was pretty pricey, a
