Re: GNOME Online Accounts 3.34 won't have documents support

[Jeremy Bicha <jbicha ubuntu com>]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 1:26 AM Debarshi Ray <rishi is lostca se> wrote:
> You already attempted to slander me once before in this thread:
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-January/msg00027.html
>
> It's been one week since I produced evidence against that:
> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2019-January/msg00035.html
>
> You had enough time to clarify your original statement or recant it. I
> no longer consider anything you say to be in good faith.

This feels like an awfully aggressive way of asking for a reply in a
heated thread that's already getting close to 100 emails. I don't know
if replying will help but since you seem to want a reply so badly and
because I do want to keep acting in good faith and not have our
relationship damaged over this, here's a reply.

> Select a recipe
> -> Buy ingredients
> -> View shopping list
> -> Share
> -> Add service
> -> Todoist

Your test case was so minimal that I didn't understand that's what it
was. Let me give a few more words. Step 0 is to build GOA with
--disable-todoist (if like me you're still using the stable version of
GOA). Then log out and log back in to make sure that you're using the
correct GOA service. The final step where you click the word Todoist
opens gnome-control-center to the Online Accounts page which does not
have a Todoist provider since we removed it in Step 0.

I did the test case a month and a half ago and drafted an email to you
to let you know about the 2 things I saw as mistakes in your commit
message but I decided it was too much like nitpicking for me to send
that email then. Maybe it would have been better if I had sent it
then.

> https://download.gnome.org/sources/gnome-todo/3.91/

Wait, GNOME To Do has one experimental release targeting GTK4 using
the same version number scheme as GTK4 and that's enough for you to
say that they are not following GNOME's Release Schedule? I think it's
reasonable to interpret the release number as a mistake (although a
fairly easy one to make given how GTK and GNOME release schedules have
been aligned fairly closely since 2011 and that the developer wasn't
around for GTK2). That version obviously isn't intended for distros to
ship and I think it's a reasonable way to identify releases in an
experimental series so that they don't conflict with new major
releases in the ordinary stable track. If you object to the version
number used, I encourage you to talk to the developer politely about
it.

I don't see a need to recant anything in my short original email. I'm
sorry that you feel so attacked in this thread and I apologize if my
replies or lack of replying feels like I'm trying to hurt you more.
That is not my intent at all.

Thanks,
Jeremy Bicha