After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 496348 - Allow editing reply quote header ("On xyz, ABC wrote")
Allow editing reply quote header ("On xyz, ABC wrote")
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
3.16.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
: 200701 632101 694066 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2007-11-13 06:12 UTC by Akhil Laddha
Modified: 2021-05-19 11:46 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
Fix (713.66 KB, patch)
2008-12-24 18:56 UTC, Sankar P
needs-work Details | Review

Description Akhil Laddha 2007-11-13 06:12:07 UTC
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=332394

It's not a very important feature, but the problem is that Evolution is not
localized to all languages so we can get crappy reply headers like that:

On Uto, 2007-10-09 at 17:39 +0200, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
   ^^^

I got the date in Croatian language, the rest of the headers in English. I was
told on evolution-hackers list that I would have modify the source code and
recompile it in order to change reply headers. It would be very nice if you
provide us a feature which would provide us editable reply headers.

Please close if you are able to find duplicate
Comment 1 André Klapper 2007-11-13 11:24:01 UTC
Akhil: PLEASE DO NOT FILE DUPLICATES. THANKS.
Comment 2 Matthew Barnes 2008-03-11 00:36:59 UTC
Bumping version to a stable release.
Comment 3 Sankar P 2008-12-24 18:56:07 UTC
Created attachment 125274 [details] [review]
Fix

I added just one row and glade-3 changed thousands of line. It may not be humanely possible to review the glade changes. So, if someone can test the .glade changes and review the rest of the source changes, it will be nice.
Comment 4 Sankar P 2008-12-24 19:04:39 UTC
*** Bug 200701 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 André Klapper 2008-12-30 18:22:25 UTC
<property name="title" translatable="yes">window1</property>

No, we do NOT want to have this translatable.
Comment 6 Sankar P 2008-12-31 04:50:43 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> <property name="title" translatable="yes">window1</property>
> 
> No, we do NOT want to have this translatable.
> 

Okay, I shall correct it. Any other feedback / review comments ?
Comment 7 Srinivasa Ragavan 2009-01-08 09:02:41 UTC
You don't free the variable attribution :-)
Comment 8 André Klapper 2009-10-18 20:53:11 UTC
ping - patch available
Comment 9 Matthew Barnes 2009-10-19 13:08:41 UTC
Not surprisingly the glade portion of the patch no longer applies.  Sankar, if you're still listening, do you remember what you changed in the UI?

Hopefully GtkBuilder will be better about not rewriting the entire XML file with every minor change...
Comment 10 Sankar P 2009-10-20 06:43:15 UTC
(In reply to comment #9)
> Not surprisingly the glade portion of the patch no longer applies.  Sankar, if
> you're still listening, do you remember what you changed in the UI?
> 

iirc, I added a text box where the user can set the reply-attribution. And used gconf-bridge to reflect this in UI etc.
Comment 11 Jan Holesovsky 2010-06-17 21:13:51 UTC
Sankar: Thanks for pointing me to this bug :-)  So, it seems that I've ended up with something similar in the bug 621150 (that one covers additionally forwarding and including the original message; OTOH has no GUI in Evo, you need to tweak the values in gconf-editor).
Comment 12 Sankar P 2010-06-18 07:17:51 UTC
(In reply to comment #11)
> Sankar: Thanks for pointing me to this bug :-)  So, it seems that I've ended up
> with something similar in the bug 621150 (that one covers additionally
> forwarding and including the original message; OTOH has no GUI in Evo, you need
> to tweak the values in gconf-editor).

Thanks for taking this. I kinda lost interest and never looked back at this patch. So, it may be a good idea to close this bug as the duplicate of the other bug, as the patch is more active/recent etc.
Comment 13 André Klapper 2010-10-15 10:32:43 UTC
*** Bug 632101 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 14 Severo Raz 2015-10-06 13:37:12 UTC
*** Bug 694066 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 15 Severo Raz 2015-10-06 13:40:48 UTC
This is still not fixed upstream right? Has everybody lost interest in this bug? I have researched a bit and one of the duplicates of this bug is 15 years old!
Comment 16 Severo Raz 2015-10-06 13:42:08 UTC
To ease the fix of this bug, I propose to have the setting hidden as a dconf setting.
Comment 17 André Klapper 2015-10-06 13:43:11 UTC
Age of a report is irrelevant in software development. 
The best way to get some problem fixed that you care about is to provide a patch. Would you fancy that? See https://wiki.gnome.org/Git/Developers - thanks!
Comment 18 Severo Raz 2015-10-06 13:47:08 UTC
Well it shouldn't be! The bug has been reported zillions of times along the years and QA hasn't put it in the roadmap :O 

I'd love to write a patch but I encourage the fellow interested parties to get involved to since I don't know the codebase. 

Perhaps if somebody could point potential collaborators (like me) in the right direction as in which files should we look into, that'd be great!
Comment 19 Severo Raz 2015-10-06 14:04:15 UTC
Good news for everyone! I have found that this bug has another duplicate, bug #621150, and this bug was fixed thanks to a patch from Mr. Milan Crha, Evolution developer. 

The attribution string and many other things can be customized, please read commit 89e3e02 if you want to research.

For example, to set YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM Sender as attribution string, run 
$ gsettings set org.gnome.evolution.mail composer-message-attribution '${Year}-${Month}-${Day} ${24Hour}':${Minute} ${Sender}'
Read on the commit I linked (or tried to) for more flags.

I think this bug can now be marked as fixed, if nobody is against it.
Comment 20 André Klapper 2015-10-06 14:59:14 UTC
(In reply to Severo Raz from comment #18)
> Well it shouldn't be! The bug has been reported zillions of times.

Two duplicates. Exaggeration has never helped anybody making a point. Whatever comes across as whining normally just decreases developers' interest.

> along the years and QA hasn't put it in the roadmap :O 

There is no "QA". If you are aware of some "Evolution QA" I'd be curious to hear names. I'm not even sure there is a "roadmap". Welcome to free software development, with about 1.5 developers for a codebase of a million lines. 
If an issue itches your scratch, provide a patch. That's how things work.
If you want support and see certain stuff fixed in a certain timeframe, get a support contract with a company providing the software.

> Perhaps if somebody could point potential collaborators (like me) in the
> right direction as in which files should we look into, that'd be great!

I'd start with the file that contains that string - can be found in a checkout of the codebase by using "find" or "grep".
Comment 21 Severo Raz 2015-10-06 15:39:40 UTC
(In reply to André Klapper from comment #20)

Ok, perhaps you could check the bug header for a fact or two.

> Two duplicates. Exaggeration has never helped anybody making a point.
> Whatever comes across as whining normally just decreases developers'
> interest.

You can find in the header 3 duplicates of this bug alone: #200701, #632101, #694066. Then if you took your time to research about it, you could find some more: #210324, #217504, #241896, #250086, #252080, #321309, #395963, #399933, #522323. And I'm not even taking my time here. I found this in less than 2 minutes. (Because I use the bug header.) So you can see I do not exaggerate. 

It is not of my particular interest to sympathize with the developers, I come here to help report bugs and channel people's interest to the developers through the appropriate ... channels. And it's not called whining, it's called stating facts, and important facts at that.

> There is no "QA". If you are aware of some "Evolution QA" I'd be curious to
> hear names. I'm not even sure there is a "roadmap". Welcome to free software
> development, with about 1.5 developers for a codebase of a million lines. 
> If an issue itches your scratch, provide a patch. That's how things work.
> If you want support and see certain stuff fixed in a certain timeframe, get
> a support contract with a company providing the software.

Is there really no QA? Lucky we didn't bet on it, because they even have an email address, Evolution QA team <evolution-qa@gnome.bugs> (see bug header for more info). Are you on it, perhaps?

I would like to welcome you to open source, where a user can contribute in many ways, varying from FOSS promotion, string translation, documentation, graphics creation, **bug reporting**, QA, to actually writing code.

Can you quote *where* I asked for a timeframe? If I recall correctly, all I did was state the fact that this was quite an old bug, that has been in the interest of quite a lot of people, so maybe it should receive some attention. I love open source, its not my fault you don't fully understand it and rush to conclusions prematurely.
 
> I'd start with the file that contains that string - can be found in a
> checkout of the codebase by using "find" or "grep".

This couple of lines was the first bit of useful information you actually wrote. However, had you read my previous comments, you'd have known that the bug is actually fixed by now.
Comment 22 André Klapper 2015-10-06 16:34:39 UTC
(In reply to Severo Raz from comment #21)
> Is there really no QA? 

Trust me, there is not. A QA team still existed about eight years ago.

> Lucky we didn't bet on it, because they even have an
> email address, Evolution QA team <evolution-qa@gnome.bugs> (see bug header
> for more info).

If you try that email address it will bounce as that domain does not exist. The Bugzilla software allows virtual assignees (with invalid email addresses).

> had you read my previous comments, you'd have known that the bug is actually fixed by now.

I have, and I still consider bug 621150 a slightly different request. :)
Comment 23 Severo Raz 2015-10-06 17:10:28 UTC
You are right, it is a different request, but the solution (although it is not yet well documented) applies also to this bug, since what Akhil Laddha requested was a way to customize the quote attribution string: 

[2007-11-13 06:12:07 UTC] Akhil Laddha (substring of comment #1):
> (...) It would be very nice if you provide us a feature which would provide us
> editable reply headers.

Thank you for your clarifications about the phantom QA team, I guess I am lucky I we didn't bet on it haha.
Comment 24 André Klapper 2021-05-19 11:46:48 UTC
GNOME is going to shut down bugzilla.gnome.org in favor of gitlab.gnome.org. 
As part of that, we are mass-closing older open tickets in bugzilla.gnome.org (resources are unfortunately quite limited so not every ticket can get handled).

If you can still reproduce the situation described in this ticket in a recent
and supported software version, then please follow
  https://wiki.gnome.org/Community/GettingInTouch/BugReportingGuidelines
and create a new enhancement request ticket at
  https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/evolution/-/issues/

Thank you for your understanding and your help.