which evolution and gtkhtml version is this exactly?

These are the breezy versions:

libgtkhtml3.8- 3.8.1-0ubuntu1
evolution      2.4.1-0ubuntu7

confirming.

In HTML mode, the proportional font size for Header4, Address, Normal, Preformatted and Address font types aren't set properly.

Any other setting works fine. Changing font size to +1,+2,+3,+4,-1,-2 works perfectly. Also for rest of the headers. The size for these settings are either maginified or diminished to get the proportional size from the font size mentioned in preferences.

In contrast Header4, Address, Normal, Preformatted and Address font types use the exact size specified in preferences which is the default font. It conflicts with the way plain text email should be rendered.

*** Bug 332820 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 246538 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

I don't think this is a bug - the default font preference is for viewing e-mail, not composing it. But a preference for the default font for html e-mail would be good.

Interestingly, manually setting a font or header in an html signature file does nothing at all - presumably GtkHtml removes it?

*** Bug 340644 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 340646 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 407851 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 407851 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 558763 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

*** Bug 544374 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

When will be GtkHtml available..any timelines?
Thanks
Sri 

Per bug 544374 (marked as dup above) font face needs to be changeable in the email compose window. Evolution doesn't currently support mixed fonts in HTML messages.

I manged to find a link which is supposed to track the progress of gtkhtml composer

http://www.go-evolution.org/New_Composer

The last news is :
"
[Jun 28, 2008] Well, the end of another development cycle is drawing near. While the improvements to the composer UI were not as extensive as I had hoped, we did get a few in. Most importantly was a second style toolbar only for HTML mode (see the revised screenshot below). I imagine we'll see more changes once we move to WebKit, but nonetheless I'm hereby declaring the Great Composer Rewrite done.
"

But I don't see the feature in evolution 2.24.1 :-(
Am I missing something here, are we tracking the correct requirement under this bug report? 

Configurable fonts were never on the table for the 2.24 rewrite.

http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=469181 
also seems to be a dup of this one. 

any idea about the target version in which this will be fixed? 
I am ready to pickup a development snapshot and build it. 

*** Bug 469181 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Hello all,

Guys (especially Evolution developers), I think we need to step back for a minute and think to whom exactly this program is targeted to. We really need to clear our heads here.

Is Evolution targeted to the casual (home) user that needs to check his POP3 gmail/yahoo/whatever account from time to time ? If yes, great ! Evolution does that job well.

However if Evolution is aimed to be used at work as the main program to access the company email, than I'm sorry to say but the truth is that Evolution is NOT suitable for that purpose.

I don't think I am wrong in saying that at work the majority of us have Exchange server. Therefore if we are to work from Linux, we need an Outlook replacement. Unfortunately Evolution is NOT ready for that role.

Another fact of life that I hope everyone will understand is that without an Outlook replacement, using Linux at work as the main desktop environment is pointless. And it won't happen. Yes you can run Outlook in a Virtual Machine but what's the point ? I still have to run Windows, I still have to buy a Windows license and antivirus and firewall and ... and ... And besides it will run slower than in a "native" environment. So no advantages at all to switch, on the contrary more headaches. Wine/Crossover is a waste of time at least with MS Office 2003 - the output/display quality is so bad (that is, if you manage to get it to work) ... you'll just damage your eyes. And after all, if we want to use Linux instead of Windows, we want to have a more pleasant experience, not struggling to cope with it.

So if your goal is for Evolution to be the Outlook replacement for Linux desktops, than the first step is to make this bug the HIGHEST priority. And get it fixed ASAP.

Very often company internal emails written in Outlook tend to be very lengthy (loads of replies). Therefore replying with Evolution and absolutely destroying the formating of such a large email ... is unforgivable. Forget about plain text. So I think preserving the formating of Outlook email when replying and forwarding is a MUST and needs to be done ASAP.

Next is the support for selectable and adjustable True Type fonts in Evolution. Honestly always using Times New Roman for HTML messages is a bad choice. And how am I suppose to correlate the +1 +2 + 3 in Evolution with actual font sizes that everyone else uses ? How will I know what the receiver is going to see ? How big is actually +2 for him ?

Ditch the "-2 -1 +0 +1 +2" thing. It's nonsense, non intuitive at all. It's really a stupid idea. Implement "what you see is what the receiver will get" with Font Types and sizes just like everyone else does.

I really think we should drop everything else planned for Evolution and concentrate on these two things first and get it done as soon as feasible possible because **THIS** is what we need **NOW**.

You know, yeah we can try to build the perfect product for the perfect society but if it won't meet the needs of the society we currently live in, nobody will use it so then what's the point in making it ? You're just wasting your time, better do something else that will actually make a difference.

I really hope you will see this email as a constructive input. I for one can't wait to actually **use** Evolution.

Best wishes.

(In reply to comment #20)
> So if your goal is for Evolution to be the Outlook replacement for Linux
> desktops, than the first step is to make this bug the HIGHEST priority. And get
> it fixed ASAP.

This is not the goal at all, hence this report does not have highest priority.

This discussion certainly doesn't belong here, but I'm not sure where else to ask. Please know I don't mean this sarcastically/rhetorically I really am curious: What IS the goal? I searched all the places I could find, but didn't see much mention of goal, or mission, or related terms. 

Thanks, and let me know where this makes more sense, if not here.

(In reply to comment #21)

>> So if your goal is for Evolution to be the Outlook replacement for Linux
>> desktops, than the first step is to make this bug the HIGHEST priority. And get
>> it fixed ASAP
>
> This is not the goal at all, hence this report does not have highest priority.
 
Well, well... Isn't it ironic then that a large part of Evolution package is in fact focused to make it a client for the Exchange server ? (although it doesn't really succeed to do so).

I remember the old days when Ximian owned Evolution - they produced the Ximian Connector for just this purpose: to connect Evolution to Exchange.

Now Novell owns Evolution and here is what they say about it:

"The most popular groupware client for Linux, Novell Evolution [...] connects to corporate communications architectures, including Microsoft Exchange and Novell GroupWise."

So Evolution is aimed at the **CORPORATE** market. And at the corporate level there are pretty much only 3 players: Exchange, Lotus Domino and GroupWise (which aren't many left).

So in theory Evolution is meant to be the Outlook replacement ... but in reality it's intentionally left broken so it won't be.

I guess Novell has no incentives to fix Evolution bugs that affect its inter-operability with Exchange. Why would they ?!? They are selling Groupwise after all (and friends with MS - doubt that MS would be happy to have an alternative for Outlook at zero cost).

So we can kiss our hopes good bye here cause this bug will never ever get sorted - it's not in Novell's and MS best interest to do so - pure business common sense after all. This is all what it comes to in the end, isn't it ?

So yes, you are right: it's not the goal and never will be.

Well, better get my XP partition back then, cause there is no hope here :-(

(In reply to comment #23)
> I guess Novell has no incentives to fix Evolution bugs that affect its
> inter-operability with Exchange.

Oh my god, reading emails in the wrong font must be sooooooo hard. "Times New Roman makes my eyes puke, I need Arial"? Sorry, but I'm tired of overexaggerating. The world won't collapse because of this missing feature.

Agreed that the world won't collapse, but in the past year I sent around 1,500 emails, and it would be really nice if I could make them look the way I wanted. It can make a big difference in presentation if users can get that kind of thing right.

I am still curious if the goals of evolution are anywhere. Because of all the mail/task/contact formats that are out there, it's near to impossible to switch mail readers, and it would be great to know if I am committing to a product that's not really intended for me.

Does anybody on this thread know of anything like that? 

I created another bug(558763) which was marked as duplicate of this one:  

I will include the report text here for reference: 

"
While composing a message you do not have any option to change the font. This
sometime is a turn-off.

This happened when I was showing evolution to one of my friends who uses
windoz, while I was editing an email he asked me how to change the fonts and I
had no solution :-(

I am not supporting MSoutlook here but as far as the font support is considered
outlook is better. 

A coupling between evolution and openoffice can help us in making the composer
the "best email composer". Not sure about the feasibility but Maybe you can
launch an embedded oowriter/calc in the composer so that the user has all the
things he can think of in an email composer.
"

This missing feature is certainly a turn-off for a GUI based composer, I won't have cared much if I was using a text based email client; mutt(the great). 
When you are in GUI you should care about these things like font/colors/WYSIWYG/Inline attachements/etc.
 
-Sri

(In reply to comment #24)
> (In reply to comment #23)
> > I guess Novell has no incentives to fix Evolution bugs that affect its
> > inter-operability with Exchange.
> 
> Oh my god, reading emails in the wrong font must be sooooooo hard. "Times New
> Roman makes my eyes puke, I need Arial"? Sorry, but I'm tired of
> overexaggerating. The world won't collapse because of this missing feature.
> 

No, but "one little thing here, one little thing there"  does put Evolution far behind in the market.

Evolution developers should go for excellence. And not being able to define the font type of your messages is DEFINITELY one step backwards in terms of program quality.

I'm quite BORED (DOES CAPITAL LETTERS REALLY IMPRESS ME? OH THEY DO!) by "My bug report is the most important one in the world" comments.
It's open source - provide a patch.
(And no, I am not an Evolution developer - this is my pesonal opinion.)

(In reply to comment #28)

Well, watching this thread one cannot miss the huge, unspeakable contribution Andre Klapper has made to this debate. We should all be thankful for him sharing with us his stunning, literally paralyzing deep cave wisdom. Andre, you are in pole position on our list in demonstrating how to completely alienate and how NOT to treat your customers. Andre, you’re da man – a truly living example for all of us !

Andre, rest assured - the thought of you working as an Evolution developer has never crossed our minds. On the contrary, your magnificent tireless efforts in rebuking any initiative to solve the problem and in ruling that if Your Highness don’t like a feature, than nobody on this planet and in fact whole Universe should ever need that feature, or God forbid, even **dare** to think they’ll need, strongly suggested to us that in fact you must be working for the big and mighty.

Andre darling, the people here are trying to work together in getting this issue solved – a concept that clearly is alien to you. And by now we all know loud and clear your stance on this matter – which is anything but helpful.

So Andre darling please, do to all of us a favor: go and find something useful to do. Like boil an egg or something. Or watch some cartoons. Take your time though – after all, there is no need for you to come back here. Your permanent absence will be noticed (and cheered) but certainly you won’t be missed !

As I said:
  Patches welcome.
  "me too" comments not welcome.
In fact I know that developers *DO* consider writing this piece of code but get demotivated everytime by comments like comment 27.
And that's what my last comment 28 refered to - like it or not.

@"Tom and Jerry": Thanks for your warm words. But no need to call me "darling" all the time, I'd also love you without that, you young gentleman, you! :-)
I guess you're relatively new to the internet, especially to how open source works and how it does not work. Stay as you are, because this world needs more people like you, even after the school break that you're probably on right now...

OK people, chill out. It's a bug. One that's kind of annoying, yes, but a bug nonetheless. And as Andre said, don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

(In reply to comment #30)
> In fact I know that developers *DO* consider writing this piece of code but get
> demotivated everytime by comments like comment 27.

That would be me.  Amidst the temper tantrums and personal attacks on this thread I've yet to hear a compelling, rational argument for why the feature is needed so desperately, other than "other mailers have it and we don't".

Seriously.  Help me understand the use cases that make custom fonts important.  Because right now it seems about as important to me as custom smiley faces.

For those asking what version this feature is targetted for, that's not really the way open source development works.  The feature will be included as soon as someone - whether a core developer or an outside contributer - shows up with a patch.  If someone else beats me to it I'd be happy to review it and offer my assistance.

The best way to vote for features is with patches.  Screaming about it from the sidelines is not going to get the code written any faster.

(In reply to comment #32)
> I've yet to hear a compelling, rational argument for why the feature is
> needed so desperately, other than "other mailers have it and we don't".
> 
> Seriously.  Help me understand the use cases that make custom fonts important. 

The use case is that other mailers have it and evolution doesn't.

This means evolution is unacceptable in a corporate environment where up-high dictates the standard format for an html formatted e-mail.

That's true enough. Another use case (mine) is the occasional need to write an email with mixed fonts. I know a lot of people that just use plain text, but from where I stand, every now and again I have a need. It could be humorous (like a joke that requires mixed fonts), it could be serious (like the desire to customize my signature with mixed fonts on every email I write). It could be that I want a standard look and feel to my emails regardless of which mail client I use. 

Admittedly, none of these reasons are all that compelling individually, but I will say that when you want the feature, and it's not there, it's one of those moments when you can't believe that such a standard feature is missing.

Like, imagine if Open Office didn't have mixed font support. There's no compelling reason why we really need it. It's nice in this report or that essay. But in sum, it's a standard, normal feature that should just be there. 

As for writing a patch, I'd be all over it if I felt qualified. Perhaps with some guidance I could take a stab at it, but it's doubtful that I could make it work. For now, I think I am limited to just writing posts like this one, and filing bugs like the duplicate of this one.

For me, the original reporter, I filed this bug because if ever I compose email in HTML mode I find that the font used is too uncomfortably small on my screen; I have to strain my eyes trying to read what I am writing, and I value my eyes too much for that.  I am the kind of guy that keeps pressing Ctrl-+ in Firefox whenever I find a web page too hard to read.  Hardcoded font sizes are always bad.

It's also a matter of consistency.  You can already customize the font size for non-html email composing, so it would make sense that for html mode you'd have a similar option.

(In reply to comment #0)
> The base font is honored for _viewing_ HTML email, but not for composing.

Gustavo, is this statement still true?

I rewrote the composer for Evolution 2.24.  I just tried setting the standard font size in Mail Preferences to something enormous, started a new HTML mail, and the default font size was as I had selected.

(In reply to comment #30)
> As I said:
>   Patches welcome.
>   "me too" comments not welcome.
> In fact I know that developers *DO* consider writing this piece of code but get
> demotivated everytime by comments like comment 27.
> And that's what my last comment 28 refered to - like it or not.
> 
> @"Tom and Jerry": Thanks for your warm words. But no need to call me "darling"
> all the time, I'd also love you without that, you young gentleman, you! :-)
> I guess you're relatively new to the internet, especially to how open source
> works and how it does not work. Stay as you are, because this world needs more
> people like you, even after the school break that you're probably on right
> now...
> 

The way I see it, developers should take into consideration the users' needs. My original comment served two purposes:

1) Reinforce the original submitter's opinion. I agree with him, Evolution is my primary mail reader and I have needed the feature while using the program.

2) Express my discontent at the kind of attitude expressed by you when you say "I think this is not essential, and my opinion is dogmatic", expressed in comment #24.

Perhaps I should have ellaborated. Perhaps I should have written what Tom and Jerry said. I'm a software developer myself. And I thrive for excellence. I believe in open source projects. But I also believe that if they are to be a serious alternative to anything else (from Windows to MacOs, from Office to Photoshop) we seriously need to lose the attitude, the pride and work as a team. And that does NOT include childish response #24 to the real issue at stake. If everyone thought like that, evolution (the noun) would never occur, Evolution (the software) wouldn't exist and we'd all be reading mail with Pine.

(In reply to comment #36)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > The base font is honored for _viewing_ HTML email, but not for composing.
> 
> Gustavo, is this statement still true?

No.

> 
> I rewrote the composer for Evolution 2.24.  I just tried setting the standard
> font size in Mail Preferences to something enormous, started a new HTML mail,
> and the default font size was as I had selected.
> 

You are correct.  The problem does not apply in Evolution 2.24.  I just had not noticed it.

I think you can close the bug report.  Thank you! :-)

Agreed.  I've moved the feature request for configurable fonts to bug #568311 where hopefully a more civil discussion will ensue.

Closing as FIXED.

*** Bug 393154 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***