Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Evolution 0.99, Release Candidate Out 443

savaget writes "Evolution 0.99 (Release Candidate 1) is out! "Yes, you read that right: the release candidate for Evolution 1.0 hit the wires this evening. After two years of hard work and more than 700 thousand lines of code written, the sleepless hackers at Ximian are finally getting to the long-awaited 1.0 release of Evolution, the GNOME groupware suite."" One of the most important projects in the open source world today. Best of luck to the monkey boys @ Ximian squashing any last minute arrivals.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Evolution 0.99, Release Candidate Out

Comments Filter:
  • bloat (Score:2, Interesting)

    by SETY ( 46845 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:20AM (#2537755)
    Does 700,000 lines of code seem a little bloated to anyone else? I guess it is suppose to do everything (kitchen sink included)..........
  • Bloated....? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by eviltypeguy ( 521224 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:23AM (#2537781)
    700,000 lines is actually pretty small compared to most commercial products these days. And depending on the language it's written in that can vary. Of course it's often been said that most Open Source projects don't have a lot of quality control in the programming department. A lot of strict guidelines are enforced on both coding style and coding documentation where I work.

    It is nice to see that the Open Source community can produce something that's every bit as good as Outlook in functionality (I didn't say stability :)...
  • Trial Installs... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FatRatBastard ( 7583 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:24AM (#2537784) Homepage
    I like Evolution a lot, and its become my e-mail client of choice as of late (well, when my machine's memory isn't going up in smoke that is) but I was wondering if anyone has done any evalutions of Evolution on a large scale basis.

    I.e. has anyone in a company been testing to see how well it plays with existing back end infrastructure (Exchange, etc)? How well does it play with others? Which features does it not play with well? Where does it need more work? Ect.
  • by Picass0 ( 147474 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:24AM (#2537793) Homepage Journal
    I did a Red Carpet update a few days ago and my Evolution now says it's ver .99 release candidate 1. Just to get rid of the "Thank you for using..." nag screen it's worth the upgrade.
  • by the_rev_matt ( 239420 ) <slashbot&revmatt,com> on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:25AM (#2537797) Homepage
    Seriously though, I've been using Evo since the .5 days and have enjoyed watching the advances in stability and feature set. Sure, it's no pine, but it's stable and offers all the functionality I need to convince my wife to try linux instead of winblows (she swears by Eudora and won't use anything else, no matter how much she complains when her Win2k box crashes several times/week).
  • I just can't get over the interface. Yes, yes, I know, it's "intuitive" (read: familiar to people who've used Outlook), it's just doesn't match the way I work. As a long-time hater of the KDE 1.x line (ugly, windows-based crap) I never thought there would come the day that I would drop Gnome and/or E in favor of KDE, but that day has come (and gone, I switched over 6 months ago). KMail is the only mail client I've used in linux that approaches Eudora in ease of use *and* features. Ingo, Marc, and Michael have crafted a nice, stable, mail client. Evolution would do well to get to the same level.

    That said, GO GNOME! If they can win me back on technical merits, rock on. I've tried evolution a few times in the past, and (like moz) people keep saying "try the latest nightlies! they are *so* much better!". Well, when they do reach 1.0, I'll try them again. Never let it be said I'm not open minded *grin*.
  • Re:Bloated....? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Publicus ( 415536 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:32AM (#2537841) Homepage

    What I've heard is that Ximian has some of the strictest guidelines for code style and quality, which is more than I can say about what I've heard of M$. Also, I don't understand your (I didn't say stability :)) remark. Are you saying Outlook is stable and Evolution is not? I wouldn't say that, as someone who has to use Outlook at work. Half the time it doesn't exit cleanly, but who knows, that could be the crappy OS too.

    Ximian's work has influenced my distribution choices in the recent past, because it is so good. Does anyone know if the Ximian Destop works with 'woody'? The Ximian site says potato, but I would imagine it would work with woody. I haven't taken the time to try yet.

  • XML-RPC / SOAP (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SnapperHead ( 178050 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:36AM (#2537853) Homepage Journal
    I wonder when / if they will be intrested in working with other projects on an open XML-RPC / SOAP standard for the data access. This way, they could pull there data from a phpGroupWare server, or pull data from any number of projects that support the standards.

    There idea would a datastore is IMAP, which makes no sense to me. But, thats how they want to add groupware functionality. I haven't been following the project very close, a few other developers in phpGroupWare have been hounding them.

    At any rate, if you would like to see there client work with other open source groupware applications via XML-RPC / SOAP. Start bugging them. :)
  • Re:Bloated....? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by richw ( 20467 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:38AM (#2537867)
    They've been promising Woody support RSN for a while but the last I heard it probably wouldn't be supported until Woody becomes stable.
  • but does it depend? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by layyze ( 216392 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:39AM (#2537879) Journal
    I used Evolution for my mail on the systems where I run Redhat 7.0 and 7.1. The problem is that on my personal machines, I run Slackware 8.0. I love Slackware and there is no way that I'll switch just for a mail client. Has anyone had much success getting around the Ximian library dependency issues? Slackware can install RPM's in its own package format and there are extension's for .TGZ's package manager to include dependencies.
    Anyway, My point is that Evolution like most of Ximian's stuff needs too many weird library dependencies (which is why I try not to use Ximian GNOME anywhere). I have tried to compile it using all of the requested RPM's and I have tried installing it and all of the requested libraries from source, but with no avail. Will there ever be a way to install it cross-distro like Mozilla or StarOffice's binary install? I think that this ability would help Evolution gain more ground in the Unix world.
  • Evolve my CellMail (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:42AM (#2537894)
    Evolution is pretty nice. But my only quandry is this:

    when mailing my friends' cell phones, KMail provides no added MIME headers, whereas evolution litters their screens with routing verbosity.

    where do we go from here?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:47AM (#2537922)
    skye:~# apt-get install evolution
    Reading Package Lists... Done
    Building Dependency Tree... Done
    The following extra packages will be installed:
    bonobo-conf libbonobo-conf0 libgnome-pilot1
    The following NEW packages will be installed:
    bonobo-conf evolution libbonobo-conf0 libgnome-pilot1
    0 packages upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.
    Need to get 8667kB of archives. After unpacking 31.9MB will be used.
    Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
    Does anybody but me rather want to use Sylpheed with its 600K binary rather than 32MB?

    Added to that, I've never been able to make Evolution even read my email box without crashing. When will it be 64 bit clean?

  • Flogged (Score:2, Interesting)

    by MindStalker ( 22827 ) <mindstalker@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:49AM (#2537931) Journal
    I know I'll get flogged for this. But, is there any chance of running this in win32?
  • Re:Port to Mac OS X? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fizz-beyond ( 130257 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:53AM (#2537953) Homepage
    What interestes me more is if there is any plans to port to any other OS in general? lets think about this for a second... They have an opensource mail client which does almost everything that outlook does (almost being that it cannot connect to MSexchange server through the propriatary MS way). If they ported it to other OS's including Mac OS X, and windows they might be able to steal some of Outlooks userbase. that and well bye bye email viruses...
  • Re:bloat (Score:2, Interesting)

    by xanadu-xtroot.com ( 450073 ) <xanadu&inorbit,com> on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:54AM (#2537962) Homepage Journal
    700,000 lines of code

    How long is a line of code? Are we talking 80 chars, or is this the average of the developers using the pretty Frame Buffer mode at 1024x768?

    Seriously. How long is a "line of code"?
  • by update() ( 217397 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @11:55AM (#2537967) Homepage
    I've tried Evolution and it works nicely, although I prefer a Eudora/KMail style interface for my own use.

    What I'm confused about is to what degree it does or doesn't work with Exchange. It's such an obvious Outlook clone and the web site brags about how it "works alongside messaging systems such as Microsoft Exchange and Lotus Notes." so I was hoping my wife could use it to replace the web interface to Exchange on her Solaris workstation. (It's not so bad when you have IE available, but it's clunky with Konqueror and awful in Communicator or Mozilla.)

    It seems, though, that Evolution supports vCard and the calendar standard (forget its name) but the Exchange mail support is limited to IMAP and POP. Is that right or am I missing something?

    By the way, for the people squabbling about Evolution vs KMail -- they're different things. I prefer the lighter interface without features I don't need but it's an apple and orange comparison.

  • NFS locking fixed? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jeff_bond ( 135948 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @12:14PM (#2538082) Homepage
    I looked through the change log, and found no mention of the NFS locking bug that you get when your home directory is an NFS mount (which is of course, a common setup on a company network).

    Does anyone know if this is fixed? It's such a basic problem that I can't believe it's been in there since version 0.8 or something. It wouldn't be so bad if evolution allowed you to specify where to put your mail store, but no, it doesn't.

    I bet this single problem alone prevents very many people from using it.

  • Re:Trial Installs... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MasterD ( 18638 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @12:18PM (#2538102) Journal
    My company will be rolling out PR1 to all it's employees on Linux and Solaris which is about 90%. We have an Exchange backend (don't ask) and Evolution works great with it. We use IMAP for mail, LDAP for contacts. And the calendering stuff we use Lookout for the web, *but* Evolution can receive the iCal requests and schedule them on a user's local calendar. This is our only complaint -- Evolution cannot see the Exchange calendar backend, thus a manager cannot see the schedules of his/her employees or other colleages.

    In our beta tests with a few managers and directors (these guys are not your normal Linux hackers), they have been very pleased. As the new Evolution betas came out, they were psyched to see more functionality and less bugs. Evolution combined with the Crossover plugin, so they can read MS DOC and PPT and XLS attachments is going to save us $500 a seat since we do not need Citrix licenses (except to edit MS formats, which is only about 10% of the time spent in Citrix after our studies). So all in all, Evolution is a great replacement for Lookout. And the Crossover plugin (with Citrix as a backup) allow us to mostly rid ourselves of M$ desktops.


    ps. Citrix is a UNIX client that allows you to connect and run a Windows desktop in an X window.
  • by YellowBook ( 58311 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @12:51PM (#2538239) Homepage
    More and more these days, linux projects are rejecting the canons of classic unix design - keep it small, keep it simple, sensibly limit the tasks solved by the code, integrate well with other utilities using simple interfaces.

    Actually, I think Evolution, Nautilus, and other newer Gnome apps really represent a revitalization of the Unix philosophy. If you take a look at Evolution, you'll see that all of its different functions are bonobo components. The same with the various views in Nautilus. They can be re-used by other applications.

    I've been really impressed by what's been done in Gnome with bonobo lately. For example, Galeon can use GTM as a download handler, getting all sorts of nice features (pause and resume downloads, e.g.) for free. Also, Galeon itself has been componentized, and Nautilus can now use Galeon for handling text/html documents. All this componentization means that each component can focus on one task and do it well, and applications can consist primarily of code to glue together components. This should sound familiar to anyone used to using shell scripts on Unix.

  • by JCMay ( 158033 ) <JeffMayNO@SPAMearthlink.net> on Thursday November 08, 2001 @12:57PM (#2538278) Homepage
    Ximian has an answer for that: Red Carpet [ximian.com] (usually) works great. Lately they've had some signature deficiencies, and there have been some dependencies that got missed WRT GIMP modules last night.

    Beyond that Linux has much more comprehensive on-line documentation [linuxdoc.org] than Windows, in my estimation.

    Case in point: I bought a Mitsume IDE CD-RW drive for my wife's school [ccsmelbourne.com]. I couldn't make any of the Windows software recognize it as a writer. I swapped it out for an older Mitsumi drive in my Linux box, and it worked just fine! Go figure. (I took the older drive to school, and *it* worked!)

    I think a previous poster was right: Windows is thought to be easy because it's ubiquitous. People mistake familiarity for ease. Bruce Tognazzini [asktog.com] talks about this idea [asktog.com].
  • by cduffy ( 652 ) <charles+slashdot@dyfis.net> on Thursday November 08, 2001 @12:58PM (#2538283)
    Not really -- this would be true, but Evolution's design is tightly compartmentalized. Let me pose a question to you: If an application uses a system such as Bonobo rather than the traditional pipes and such to integrate separate components into a single unified whole, does this really make it any less integrated than those using the traditional (pipe-based) approach? Certainly, it makes for a more tightly integrated look-and-feel, which may lead to charges of bloatware by those not knowing that the object model is working under the covers; the actual design needs to be considered, though, before that charge can be said to have any substance.
  • Re:bloat (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ethereal ( 13958 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @01:56PM (#2538608) Journal

    Also, we tend to compare our internal projects on the basis of assembly-equivalent LOC, or AELOC. Otherwise you can't compare across platforms and languages. For reference, we use the ratio 2.5 AELOC (on a Motorola microcontroller, so fairly RISC-like) equals one C LOC. It would be interesting to see if this is a common ratio for development on x86 hardware, and what ratios others are using for other languages.

  • by Sloppy ( 14984 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @02:16PM (#2538783) Homepage Journal

    I just can't get over the interface. Yes, yes, I know, it's "intuitive" (read: familiar to people who've used Outlook), it's just doesn't match the way I work.

    Then you are not the target audience for this. The whole point is that it's supposed to be Outlook-like. Not because Outlook is technically or ergonomically worth copying, but because Outlook is strategically worth copying. Read what Miguel writes -- he's not trying to make the ultimate email reader; he's trying to make an infiltration tool.

    There's no point in Unix-heads running this program. It's mean to be run by ex-Dozers, so that they won't notice/complain that they've been switcheroo'd.

    Keep using whatever email reader you've always used. You're not supposed to switch to this.

  • Re:pop3 or imap (Score:3, Interesting)

    by irix ( 22687 ) on Thursday November 08, 2001 @07:30PM (#2540561) Journal

    I have an IMAP email box at my current place of employment, and I had never used it before coming here.

    If I can help it I will never go back to POP. I read the same email box using Outlook 2K on NT, pine on Solaris, Kmail and Evolution my Linux boxen at home, Netscape Messenger on my SGI and Pocket Outlook on my iPaq.

    If more ISPs offered IMAP and people knew the advantages they wouldn't touch POP with a 100ft pole.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 08, 2001 @09:49PM (#2541289)
    KDE 2.x uses a hack called kdeinit that preloads shared libraries in the right order to minimize relocations and speed up application start times. It is a very non-portable hack, which is why you don't see KDE 2.x on some commercial UNIX platforms either.

    I believe it is possible to build KDE without kdeinit, but I don't think too many people using Fink really care all that much. First of all, they already have a desktop environment in MacOS X and are primarily interested in apps. Second, those few that are interested in running KDE stuff are hoping they will eventually be able to build it using the native (non-X11) Qt port to get the Aqua look & feel. That leaves the GNU-Darwin users, who generally aren't interested in KDE either for philosophical reasons.

    All things considered, the fact that KDE is written in C++ really isn't an issue at all. And the Fink distribution contains a fair number of other C++ apps and libs.

To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. -- Elbert Hubbard