FYI: new iCalendar

[Butrus Damaskus]

High!

New version of iCalendar was accepted as RFC 5545 (see eg.
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5545.txt). Does this mean something
for evolution development? :-o

B.
_______________________________________________
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

[Matthew Barnes]

On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 15:21 +0200, Butrus Damaskus wrote:
> New version of iCalendar was accepted as RFC 5545 (see eg.
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5545.txt). Does this mean something
> for evolution development? :-o

Looks like it's basically just errata from RFC 2445 (see page 166).  I'm
sure the corrections can be implemented or verified pretty easily.  The
burden may fall on the Free Association project as much as if not more
so than on us.

Matthew Barnes

_______________________________________________
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

[Suman Manjunath-2]

On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 11:37 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 15:21 +0200, Butrus Damaskus wrote:
> > New version of iCalendar was accepted as RFC 5545 (see eg.
> > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5545.txt). Does this mean something
> > for evolution development? :-o
>
> Looks like it's basically just errata from RFC 2445 (see page 166).  I'm
> sure the corrections can be implemented or verified pretty easily.  The
> burden may fall on the Free Association project as much as if not more
> so than on us.

Wondering why it is an entirely new RFC for a bunch (11 to be precise)
of errata. It could easily have been RFC 2445 spec 2 or something
similar.

-Suman

_______________________________________________
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers

[Andrew McMillan-4]

On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 14:22 -0400, Suman Manjunath wrote:

> On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 11:37 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 15:21 +0200, Butrus Damaskus wrote:
> > > New version of iCalendar was accepted as RFC 5545 (see eg.
> > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5545.txt). Does this mean something
> > > for evolution development? :-o
> >
> > Looks like it's basically just errata from RFC 2445 (see page 166).  I'm
> > sure the corrections can be implemented or verified pretty easily.  The
> > burden may fall on the Free Association project as much as if not more
> > so than on us.
>
> Wondering why it is an entirely new RFC for a bunch (11 to be precise)
> of errata. It could easily have been RFC 2445 spec 2 or something
> similar.

That's the standard process for updating RFCs.  You'll notice that it's
been done the same way for RFC822 -> 2822 and for DAV RFC2518 -> 4918,
etc.

The last two digits of the original RFC number are maintained for
mnemonic reasons during the process, too.

Cheers,
                                        Andrew.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://andrew.mcmillan.net.nz/                     Porirua, New Zealand
Twitter: _karora                                  Phone: +64(272)DEBIAN
                Necessity is the mother of documentation
------------------------------------------------------------------------



_______________________________________________
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers