Do you use Evolution? Can you connect to the Exchange server via IMAP? If so, you should receive be able to get meeting requests; just accept them and they will go in your local calendar.
That's a cool feature of Evolution... of course I've never used it before. I'd try it out except so far no syncing with my ipaq is possible on Linux:(, so I must use my outlook client.
It will send an iCalendar meeting request to the recipients, which looks just like a meeting request generated by Outlook.
So having Evolution recognize an Outlook meeting request is one thing (regexp). But having an Outlook client recognize your Evolution generated meeting request is another.
Have you verified that it indeed works? I have tried to mimic exactly the format necessary but haven't been able to get the actual Outlook client to recognize it.
I have 2 PCs, and one (the one that runs Windows) exists for the sole purpose of Outlook calendar.
I don't use my exchange email much (it's even hidden in the directory), but would like to forward meeting requests (as a copy) to it so I can just accept and have it pop into my calendar.
So... naturally I put in some procmail lines to forward those messages. It works... except something magic is gone, and it doesn't show up in Outlook as a meeting request/invitation.
Perhaps I don't have very complex needs, but it seems to me that CVS is already incredibly flexible and has all the advantages of Free Software.
CVS is a proven workhorse. I use it every day, keep my configuration files in a module, etc. in addition to my source code at work. But there are some things that are absolutely maddening about it (the early AC post with 12 must-have's hits several of them on the head). Personally, as my CVS usage is for a relatively small team, the lack of atomic commits just hasn't bitten me yet, although I can see why it's important for a best-of-breed tool.
But a couple of day-to-day common tasks are painful (or just plain impossible).
Personally, sharing source files across multiple projects is a real pain. We do it with soft links in the repository (gag) so it can be done, but it's ugly.
Let's say you want to reorganize your directory structure without screwing up your history. Well, that's hard to do with CVS, so instead we'll just let the organization continue to be cluttered and confusing.
Heck, let's say you just want to rename a file, let alone a directory:
cp foo.c bar.c cvs add bar.c cvs remove -f foo.c cvs ci -m "renamed foo.c to bar.c"
It just gets really annoying, and now bar.c can't be reverted version-wise unless you KNOW that its previous contents were in foo.c. It's a manual, error-prone, and tedious process if you ever need to do that.
I've been running a subversion server for months now just to test out. I can't wait to move to it. I like being able to say:
svn mv foo.c bar.c svn ci -m "renamed foo.c bar.c"
and keep my history intact.In fact, writing this makes me want to just start migrating stuff by hand today! Subversion's important bugs (it is still alpha I think, it's slashdotted so I can't check the status as of right now) are almost all in features that CVS doesn't have anyway.
That said, I haven't really tried any of the other open source projects such as arch which have similar features. The main draw of subversion for me is the fact that I had to learn almost nothing to use it. As an experienced CVS user, subversion is trivial to learn. The effort they have put in to keeping things the same as long as there is no good reason to do otherwise is well-spent (at least from my point of view).
Plus, the subversion code is super readable and well-commented--honestly the best source I've seen.
If we could all debate politics as cleary, and with as much fervor as we debate technology, we would make a difference.
Given the general character of most slashdot comments, I would suggest that if we did this, we would be quickly dismissed as those who have been "hopelessly corrupted by the smut on the internet." (or some similar nonsense)
Read many of the comments... they sound like they are written by pre-teenagers who think that the effectiveness of your communication is proportional to the profanity contained therein or the forcefulness of the assertions.
In all seriousness, it is doubtful that any such meaningful work would escape having its credibility ruined by those who can't refrain from blasting everyone who they see as not agreeing with them.
Not the chips, but the interconnects between layers. If I'm not mistaken, coppermine refers to how the interconnects are done. Usually they're done with (I believe) tungsten plugs, but the coppermine chips use copper.
Chips are silicon... interconnect has usually been aluminum (as is the case with coppermine). 'copper' chips use copper interconnect and coppermine will not use copper interconnect.
The Alpha is an established 64-bit standard, and I can understand its manuals. I cannot understand the manuals for the Merced.
IA-64 has been accepted by most of the major companies out there as the standard of the future. It is bigger than just Merced. The port to IA-64 is a big win for Linux. Whether you _like_ the architecture or not it is probably going to be a powerful force.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a cool feature of Evolution... of course I've never used it before. I'd try it out except so far no syncing with my ipaq is possible on Linux
So having Evolution recognize an Outlook meeting request is one thing (regexp). But having an Outlook client recognize your Evolution generated meeting request is another.
Have you verified that it indeed works? I have tried to mimic exactly the format necessary but haven't been able to get the actual Outlook client to recognize it.
So how do you send and receive meeting requests?
I have 2 PCs, and one (the one that runs Windows) exists for the sole purpose of Outlook calendar.
I don't use my exchange email much (it's even hidden in the directory), but would like to forward meeting requests (as a copy) to it so I can just accept and have it pop into my calendar.
So... naturally I put in some procmail lines to forward those messages. It works... except something magic is gone, and it doesn't show up in Outlook as a meeting request/invitation.
Anyone know how to do this? Or is it impossible?
Right... because the reason make is so popular is that it is written in a "real" language, sh!
But a couple of day-to-day common tasks are painful (or just plain impossible).
Personally, sharing source files across multiple projects is a real pain. We do it with soft links in the repository (gag) so it can be done, but it's ugly.
Let's say you want to reorganize your directory structure without screwing up your history. Well, that's hard to do with CVS, so instead we'll just let the organization continue to be cluttered and confusing.
Heck, let's say you just want to rename a file, let alone a directory:
cp foo.c bar.c
cvs add bar.c
cvs remove -f foo.c
cvs ci -m "renamed foo.c to bar.c"
It just gets really annoying, and now bar.c can't be reverted version-wise unless you KNOW that its previous contents were in foo.c. It's a manual, error-prone, and tedious process if you ever need to do that.
I've been running a subversion server for months now just to test out. I can't wait to move to it. I like being able to say:
svn mv foo.c bar.c
svn ci -m "renamed foo.c bar.c"
and keep my history intact.In fact, writing this makes me want to just start migrating stuff by hand today! Subversion's important bugs (it is still alpha I think, it's slashdotted so I can't check the status as of right now) are almost all in features that CVS doesn't have anyway.
That said, I haven't really tried any of the other open source projects such as arch which have similar features. The main draw of subversion for me is the fact that I had to learn almost nothing to use it. As an experienced CVS user, subversion is trivial to learn. The effort they have put in to keeping things the same as long as there is no good reason to do otherwise is well-spent (at least from my point of view).
Plus, the subversion code is super readable and well-commented--honestly the best source I've seen.
I blame you for the Pepsi I just sprayed all over my computer screen!
Seriously, you made my day--thanks!
OT--I just saw the trailer and I have to say I'm hopeful for this one...
Given the general character of most slashdot comments, I would suggest that if we did this, we would be quickly dismissed as those who have been "hopelessly corrupted by the smut on the internet." (or some similar nonsense)
Read many of the comments... they sound like they are written by pre-teenagers who think that the effectiveness of your communication is proportional to the profanity contained therein or the forcefulness of the assertions.
In all seriousness, it is doubtful that any such meaningful work would escape having its credibility ruined by those who can't refrain from blasting everyone who they see as not agreeing with them.
Chips are silicon... interconnect has usually been aluminum (as is the case with coppermine). 'copper' chips use copper interconnect and coppermine will not use copper interconnect.
IA-64 has been accepted by most of the major companies out there as the standard of the future. It is bigger than just Merced. The port to IA-64 is a big win for Linux.
Whether you _like_ the architecture or not it is probably going to be a powerful force.
By the time IA-64 is dominant I think that SGI will be helping to ensure that Linux will be up to speed on issues necessary for that.
So... how about a donation to the Linux project of some parts of the IRIX filesystem, eh? Journaling?