|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 18:53:41
|
Hello all, I have a Feature Request for this at: https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> not just em...@ex... |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 20:39:28
|
On 2013-03-12 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > Hello all, > > I have a Feature Request for this at: > > https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ > > To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: > > From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> > > not just > > em...@ex... To clarify... First it should test for whether or not there is a real name in the DB. If there is, use RFC 822 style (per above), if there isn't, use RFC 821 style. |
|
From: Jan K. <pf...@cr...> - 2013-03-13 20:37:39
|
Hi, I post a patch 155 & 116 "real name" on 2012-05-24 to do that a part of this patch reads out of the pfa_database and replace this in the from string by vacation.pl Regards Jan Kruis Op 12 mrt 2013, om 19:53 heeft Tanstaafl het volgende geschreven: > Hello all, > > I have a Feature Request for this at: > > https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ > > To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: > > From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> > > not just > > em...@ex... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-14 11:05:27
|
Hi Jan, Where did you post these patches? Any chance you could post a reply to mu bug/Feature Request, and include a link to the patches? Were they accepted into the core code? Thanks very much Charles On 2013-03-13 4:18 PM, Jan Kruis <pf...@cr...> wrote: > Hi, > > I post a patch 155 & 116 "real name" on 2012-05-24 to do that > > a part of this patch reads out of the pfa_database and replace this in the from string by vacation.pl > > Regards Jan Kruis > > > Op 12 mrt 2013, om 19:53 heeft Tanstaafl het volgende geschreven: > >> Hello all, >> >> I have a Feature Request for this at: >> >> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >> >> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >> >> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >> >> not just >> >> em...@ex... >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. >> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics >> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar >> _______________________________________________ >> Postfixadmin-devel mailing list >> Pos...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel > |
|
From: Jan K. <pf...@cr...> - 2013-03-14 15:44:46
|
Hi Charles, this is the url to the patch http://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/patches/116/ http://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/patches/115/ Jan Op 14 mrt 2013, om 12:04 heeft Tanstaafl het volgende geschreven: > Hi Jan, > > Where did you post these patches? > > Any chance you could post a reply to mu bug/Feature Request, and include > a link to the patches? > > Were they accepted into the core code? > > Thanks very much > > Charles > > On 2013-03-13 4:18 PM, Jan Kruis <pf...@cr...> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I post a patch 155 & 116 "real name" on 2012-05-24 to do that >> >> a part of this patch reads out of the pfa_database and replace this in the from string by vacation.pl >> >> Regards Jan Kruis >> >> >> Op 12 mrt 2013, om 19:53 heeft Tanstaafl het volgende geschreven: >> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> I have a Feature Request for this at: >>> >>> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >>> >>> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >>> >>> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >>> >>> not just >>> >>> em...@ex... >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. >>> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics >>> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Postfixadmin-devel mailing list >>> Pos...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. >> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics >> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar >> _______________________________________________ >> Postfixadmin-devel mailing list >> Pos...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-14 16:29:34
|
Hi Jan, Ouch... this patch touches a lot of files... Is this code included in 2.3.6? Or maybe trunk? I'd rather not apply this many changes myself (I know just enough programming to be very dangerous - but at least I know it)... ;) I'm still on 2.3.4 (not too worried about security issues, as postfixadmin is on a secured box with no access from outside), but if this code is available in 2.3.6, that would be a huge reason for me to upgrade now. If it is available in trunk (soon to be 3.0?), then I guess I'll just have to wait... On that note... does anyone know if 3.0 will ship anytime in the near future (ie, next few months, or at least this year)? Thanks again Jan, even if I can't take advantage of it now, I really do appreciate you getting the code done... Charles On 2013-03-14 11:43 AM, Jan Kruis <pf...@cr...> wrote: > Hi Charles, > > this is the url to the patch > > http://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/patches/116/ > > http://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/patches/115/ > > Jan > > > Op 14 mrt 2013, om 12:04 heeft Tanstaafl het volgende geschreven: > >> Hi Jan, >> >> Where did you post these patches? >> >> Any chance you could post a reply to mu bug/Feature Request, and include >> a link to the patches? >> >> Were they accepted into the core code? >> >> Thanks very much >> >> Charles >> >> On 2013-03-13 4:18 PM, Jan Kruis <pf...@cr...> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I post a patch 155 & 116 "real name" on 2012-05-24 to do that >>> >>> a part of this patch reads out of the pfa_database and replace this in the from string by vacation.pl >>> >>> Regards Jan Kruis >>> >>> >>> Op 12 mrt 2013, om 19:53 heeft Tanstaafl het volgende geschreven: >>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> I have a Feature Request for this at: >>>> >>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >>>> >>>> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >>>> >>>> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >>>> >>>> not just >>>> >>>> em...@ex... |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-28 16:37:42
|
Revisiting this now that we have nicely solved the multi-string capability for the noreply function... So... Since the 3rd line in the vacation.log for a vacation transaction is using the RFC 822 Style (contains the "Real Name") for the 'To' header: >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' Doesn't this mean that it is *already available* as a variable, since the logger is obviously using it? If so, then would some kind soul who knows the code well enough to know where/what to look for, please take a peek and see what the variable name is so that we can simply modify the script that generates the vacation email to use it, resulting in the above line being: >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. Thanks! Charles On 2013-03-12 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > Hello all, > > I have a Feature Request for this at: > > https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ > > To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: > > From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> > > not just > > em...@ex... |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-28 16:55:53
Attachments:
rudi_floren.vcf
|
I think it would be better to get the Real Name from Database. This way the User (Mailbox owner) can define his name which will be display in vacation message. Your way the Real Name in the vacation mail is set by the sender of the original mail. I think this isnt a good behavior. Rudi Am 28.03.2013 17:36, schrieb Tanstaafl: > Revisiting this now that we have nicely solved the multi-string > capability for the noreply function... > > So... > > Since the 3rd line in the vacation.log for a vacation transaction is > using the RFC 822 Style (contains the "Real Name") for the 'To' header: > >>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' > Doesn't this mean that it is *already available* as a variable, since > the logger is obviously using it? If so, then would some kind soul who > knows the code well enough to know where/what to look for, please take a > peek and see what the variable name is so that we can simply modify the > script that generates the vacation email to use it, resulting in the > above line being: > >>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. > Thanks! > > Charles > > > On 2013-03-12 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> I have a Feature Request for this at: >> >> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >> >> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >> >> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >> >> not just >> >> em...@ex... > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Own the Future-Intel® Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013 > Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest. > Compete for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game > on Steam. $5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes. > Submit your demo by 6/6/13. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel_levelupd2d > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-28 17:13:24
|
I'd be ok with that - and we could have big scary warnings to the admin about making sure that the real names in the DB are clean... So, that would mean it is just defining the variable in the SQL query that queries for the vacation message, then modifying the script that generates the email to use it... right? Doesn't *sound* too hard (for someone who does this stuff for a living)... ;) On 2013-03-28 12:55 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > I think it would be better to get the Real Name from Database. > This way the User (Mailbox owner) can define his name which will be > display in vacation message. > > Your way the Real Name in the vacation mail is set by the sender of the > original mail. I think this isnt a good behavior. > > Rudi > > Am 28.03.2013 17:36, schrieb Tanstaafl: >> Revisiting this now that we have nicely solved the multi-string >> capability for the noreply function... >> >> So... >> >> Since the 3rd line in the vacation.log for a vacation transaction is >> using the RFC 822 Style (contains the "Real Name") for the 'To' header: >> >>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' >> Doesn't this mean that it is *already available* as a variable, since >> the logger is obviously using it? If so, then would some kind soul who >> knows the code well enough to know where/what to look for, please take a >> peek and see what the variable name is so that we can simply modify the >> script that generates the vacation email to use it, resulting in the >> above line being: >> >>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. >> Thanks! >> >> Charles >> >> >> On 2013-03-12 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> >>> I have a Feature Request for this at: >>> >>> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >>> >>> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >>> >>> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >>> >>> not just >>> >>> em...@ex... |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-28 17:22:55
Attachments:
rudi_floren.vcf
|
Jan K. already posted a patch. i'm not sure if somone already pulled it into SVN. Am 28.03.2013 18:12, schrieb Tanstaafl: > I'd be ok with that - and we could have big scary warnings to the admin > about making sure that the real names in the DB are clean... > > So, that would mean it is just defining the variable in the SQL query > that queries for the vacation message, then modifying the script that > generates the email to use it... right? > > Doesn't *sound* too hard (for someone who does this stuff for a > living)... ;) > > On 2013-03-28 12:55 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> I think it would be better to get the Real Name from Database. >> This way the User (Mailbox owner) can define his name which will be >> display in vacation message. >> >> Your way the Real Name in the vacation mail is set by the sender of the >> original mail. I think this isnt a good behavior. >> >> Rudi >> >> Am 28.03.2013 17:36, schrieb Tanstaafl: >>> Revisiting this now that we have nicely solved the multi-string >>> capability for the noreply function... >>> >>> So... >>> >>> Since the 3rd line in the vacation.log for a vacation transaction is >>> using the RFC 822 Style (contains the "Real Name") for the 'To' header: >>> >>>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' >>> Doesn't this mean that it is *already available* as a variable, since >>> the logger is obviously using it? If so, then would some kind soul who >>> knows the code well enough to know where/what to look for, please take a >>> peek and see what the variable name is so that we can simply modify the >>> script that generates the vacation email to use it, resulting in the >>> above line being: >>> >>>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> >>> On 2013-03-12 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> I have a Feature Request for this at: >>>> >>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >>>> >>>> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >>>> >>>> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >>>> >>>> not just >>>> >>>> em...@ex... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Own the Future-Intel® Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013 > Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest. > Compete for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game > on Steam. $5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes. > Submit your demo by 6/6/13. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel_levelupd2d > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-28 17:33:08
|
Sorry, I should have included his earlier responses in that email... The problem is I have no clue how to look for it to see if it is there, or be able to tell what version it is in. I know for sure it isn't in 2.3.4 (what I'm on now). If it is in 2.3.6, that would be all the reason I'd need to upgrade this weekend. I haven't really worried about running a slightly older version because mine is only accessible from my workstation IP on a local network. Thanks Rudi... On 2013-03-28 1:22 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > Jan K. already posted a patch. i'm not sure if somone already pulled it > into SVN. > > > Am 28.03.2013 18:12, schrieb Tanstaafl: >> I'd be ok with that - and we could have big scary warnings to the admin >> about making sure that the real names in the DB are clean... >> >> So, that would mean it is just defining the variable in the SQL query >> that queries for the vacation message, then modifying the script that >> generates the email to use it... right? >> >> Doesn't *sound* too hard (for someone who does this stuff for a >> living)... ;) >> >> On 2013-03-28 12:55 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >>> I think it would be better to get the Real Name from Database. >>> This way the User (Mailbox owner) can define his name which will be >>> display in vacation message. >>> >>> Your way the Real Name in the vacation mail is set by the sender of the >>> original mail. I think this isnt a good behavior. >>> >>> Rudi >>> >>> Am 28.03.2013 17:36, schrieb Tanstaafl: >>>> Revisiting this now that we have nicely solved the multi-string >>>> capability for the noreply function... >>>> >>>> So... >>>> >>>> Since the 3rd line in the vacation.log for a vacation transaction is >>>> using the RFC 822 Style (contains the "Real Name") for the 'To' header: >>>> >>>>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' >>>> Doesn't this mean that it is *already available* as a variable, since >>>> the logger is obviously using it? If so, then would some kind soul who >>>> knows the code well enough to know where/what to look for, please take a >>>> peek and see what the variable name is so that we can simply modify the >>>> script that generates the vacation email to use it, resulting in the >>>> above line being: >>>> >>>>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Charles >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2013-03-12 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: >>>>> Hello all, >>>>> >>>>> I have a Feature Request for this at: >>>>> >>>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >>>>> >>>>> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >>>>> >>>>> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >>>>> >>>>> not just >>>>> >>>>> em...@ex... |
|
From: Jan K. <pf...@cr...> - 2013-03-28 21:49:50
|
Hi Charles, The patch i made is base on the trunk svn 1388 The adjustment that I made is based on trunk svn 1388. The total adjustment contains multiple function but the adjustment for REAL NAME is quite small. And as operates as follows. If no string in the name is entered, the emailadres of the user used. Ginderdog in his email of 14 March has coding out the piece for "realname" of the total code. Regards Jan Kruis Op 28 mrt 2013, om 18:32 heeft Tanstaafl het volgende geschreven: > Sorry, I should have included his earlier responses in that email... > > The problem is I have no clue how to look for it to see if it is there, > or be able to tell what version it is in. I know for sure it isn't in > 2.3.4 (what I'm on now). If it is in 2.3.6, that would be all the reason > I'd need to upgrade this weekend. > > I haven't really worried about running a slightly older version because > mine is only accessible from my workstation IP on a local network. > > Thanks Rudi... > > On 2013-03-28 1:22 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> Jan K. already posted a patch. i'm not sure if somone already pulled it >> into SVN. >> >> >> Am 28.03.2013 18:12, schrieb Tanstaafl: >>> I'd be ok with that - and we could have big scary warnings to the admin >>> about making sure that the real names in the DB are clean... >>> >>> So, that would mean it is just defining the variable in the SQL query >>> that queries for the vacation message, then modifying the script that >>> generates the email to use it... right? >>> >>> Doesn't *sound* too hard (for someone who does this stuff for a >>> living)... ;) >>> >>> On 2013-03-28 12:55 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >>>> I think it would be better to get the Real Name from Database. >>>> This way the User (Mailbox owner) can define his name which will be >>>> display in vacation message. >>>> >>>> Your way the Real Name in the vacation mail is set by the sender of the >>>> original mail. I think this isnt a good behavior. >>>> >>>> Rudi >>>> >>>> Am 28.03.2013 17:36, schrieb Tanstaafl: >>>>> Revisiting this now that we have nicely solved the multi-string >>>>> capability for the noreply function... >>>>> >>>>> So... >>>>> >>>>> Since the 3rd line in the vacation.log for a vacation transaction is >>>>> using the RFC 822 Style (contains the "Real Name") for the 'To' header: >>>>> >>>>>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' >>>>> Doesn't this mean that it is *already available* as a variable, since >>>>> the logger is obviously using it? If so, then would some kind soul who >>>>> knows the code well enough to know where/what to look for, please take a >>>>> peek and see what the variable name is so that we can simply modify the >>>>> script that generates the vacation email to use it, resulting in the >>>>> above line being: >>>>> >>>>>>> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Real Name" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. >>>>> Thanks! >>>>> >>>>> Charles >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2013-03-12 2:53 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: >>>>>> Hello all, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a Feature Request for this at: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/30/ >>>>>> >>>>>> To put it simply, I want the vacation message to show as: >>>>>> >>>>>> From: "Real Name" <em...@ex...> >>>>>> >>>>>> not just >>>>>> >>>>>> em...@ex... > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Own the Future-Intel® Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013 > Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest. > Compete for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game > on Steam. $5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes. > Submit your demo by 6/6/13. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel_levelupd2d > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-29 18:00:49
|
Hi Jan, Thanks... but alas, while 'trunk svn 1388' may mean much to you, it doesn't to me... ;) My question is, is this code included in any of the formal stable releases (2.3.5? 2.3.6?)? If not, will it make it into the next stable release (presumably 2.3.7)? Or is this only in the new 3.x trunk? Thanks again for your efforts with the patches!! On 2013-03-28 5:48 PM, Jan Kruis <pf...@cr...> wrote: > Hi Charles, > > The patch i made is base on the trunk svn 1388 > > The adjustment that I made is based on trunk svn 1388. > The total adjustment contains multiple function but the adjustment for REAL NAME is quite small. > And as operates as follows. > If no string in the name is entered, the emailadres of the user used. > Ginderdog in his email of 14 March has coding out the piece for "realname" of the total code. |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-04-02 13:28:21
|
Anyone? On 2013-03-29 2:00 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > Hi Jan, > > Thanks... but alas, while 'trunk svn 1388' may mean much to you, it > doesn't to me... ;) > > My question is, is this code included in any of the formal stable > releases (2.3.5? 2.3.6?)? If not, will it make it into the next stable > release (presumably 2.3.7)? > > Or is this only in the new 3.x trunk? > > Thanks again for your efforts with the patches!! > > On 2013-03-28 5:48 PM, Jan Kruis <pf...@cr...> wrote: >> Hi Charles, >> >> The patch i made is base on the trunk svn 1388 >> >> The adjustment that I made is based on trunk svn 1388. >> The total adjustment contains multiple function but the adjustment for REAL NAME is quite small. >> And as operates as follows. >> If no string in the name is entered, the emailadres of the user used. >> Ginderdog in his email of 14 March has coding out the piece for "realname" of the total code. |
|
From: Christian B. <pos...@cb...> - 2013-04-02 19:45:42
|
Hello, Am Freitag, 29. März 2013 schrieb Tanstaafl: > Thanks... but alas, while 'trunk svn 1388' may mean much to you, it > doesn't to me... ;) "trunk" means the latest development version - the code that will become 3.0. > My question is, is this code included in any of the formal stable > releases (2.3.5? 2.3.6?)? If not, will it make it into the next stable > release (presumably 2.3.7)? > > Or is this only in the new 3.x trunk? The 2.3 branch is in maintenance mode (bugfixes only), which means 2.3.x won't get the new vacation.pl features. On the positive side, SVN trunk (which will become 3.0) is quite stable. Everything in the web interface should work (if not, report a bugreport), and the CLI is also getting better (I deleted (!) ~500 lines to complete the create and update commands yesterday ;-) - the other commands may or may not work). I even found some time to handle some long-standing TODOs yesterday ;-) (see the commit mailinglist for details) In other words: feel free to use SVN trunk ;-) BTW, while looking at the random (really!) signature: I'm still looking for someone who can shorten the changelog from 2.3.x to current SVN trunk - are you interested? ;-) (My current draft with 370 lines is probably too long for the average user ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- Yes, I know how much devs hate writing documentation... I was a dev. [Carlos E. R. in opensuse-factory] |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-04-03 13:10:53
|
On 2013-04-02 3:45 PM, Christian Boltz <pos...@cb...> wrote: > Am Freitag, 29. März 2013 schrieb Tanstaafl: >> My question is, is this code included in any of the formal stable >> releases (2.3.5? 2.3.6?)? If not, will it make it into the next stable >> release (presumably 2.3.7)? >> >> Or is this only in the new 3.x trunk? > The 2.3 branch is in maintenance mode (bugfixes only), which means 2.3.x > won't get the new vacation.pl features. > > On the positive side, SVN trunk (which will become 3.0) is quite stable. > Everything in the web interface should work (if not, report a > bugreport), and the CLI is also getting better (I deleted (!) ~500 > lines to complete the create and update commands yesterday ;-) - the > other commands may or may not work). > > I even found some time to handle some long-standing TODOs yesterday ;-) > (see the commit mailinglist for details) > > In other words: feel free to use SVN trunk ;-) Well, I really try to avoid installing things outside of my package manager (portage/gentoo), as I am far from expert at these things... I'll go open an update/bump request for SVN trunk - but if it is really that stable, why not make an official release, at least for the one with the web based interface (thats all I and many people use anyway)? > BTW, while looking at the random (really!) signature: > I'm still looking for someone who can shorten the changelog from 2.3.x > to current SVN trunk - are you interested? ;-) (My current draft with > 370 lines is probably too long for the average user ;-) Depends on what you mean by 'shorten the changelog'? If you mean edit it/clean the text up, I would be happy to help, but being that I'm not a coder, I'm not sure I'd know exactly what/how to clean it up. If you mean back-porting things from SVN trunk to 2.3 branch, would love to, but again - I'm not a coder... :( Thanks Christian for the response... |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-04-06 14:53:44
|
On 2013-04-03 9:10 AM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > I'll go open an update/bump request for SVN trunk - but if it is really > that stable, why not make an official release, at least for the one with > the web based interface (thats all I and many people use anyway)? ? I'm seriously interested. I totally understand if the CLI version is intricately connected, and you can't really release the stable version until it is ready too... |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-04-06 16:15:44
|
On 2013-04-06 10:53 AM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > On 2013-04-03 9:10 AM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: >> I'll go open an update/bump request for SVN trunk - but if it is really >> that stable, why not make an official release, at least for the one with >> the web based interface (thats all I and many people use anyway)? > > ? I'm seriously interested. I totally understand if the CLI version is > intricately connected, and you can't really release the stable version > until it is ready too... Also... if you have even a vague estimation of how much longer before it goes stable, if it isn't too long, that may help motivate the gentoo package maintainer to go ahead and get it ready now... Anyway, thanks, I'm really looking forward to 3.x... |
