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 566269 - Evolution Calendar does not retain calendars for offline use
Evolution Calendar does not retain calendars for offline use
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 508501
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Calendar
2.24.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal major
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-calendar-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2009-01-02 09:03 UTC by jarlathreidy
Modified: 2009-01-02 13:28 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.23/2.24



Description jarlathreidy 2009-01-02 09:03:43 UTC
Web calendars which I have marked "Make available for offline use" are not available when offline.

Steps to reproduce:
1) Choose to add a new calendar
2) Choose Web Calendar
3) Paste in your private link for a Google calendar (eg. webcal://www.google.....)
4) Check the box labelled "Copy calendar contents locally for offline operation"

The calendar can now be viewed in Evolution.

5) Close evolution and disconnect your computer from the internet.
6) Reload Evolution with no network connection
7) The calendar is not available

Expected behaviour:
At step 7, the web calendar should have been available for me to view offline.

I've marked the severity as major since our business will have to drop Gnome if the issue isn't fixed. I feel Evolution is tightly intergrated with the desktop and for any business relying on the calendar feature, it renders the rest of the desktop features irrelevant since they cannot liase with Evolution / Calendar.
Comment 1 jarlathreidy 2009-01-02 09:04:12 UTC
I've also posted a bug on Ubuntu's launchpad system
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/evolution/+bug/306692
Comment 2 Matthew Barnes 2009-01-02 13:28:16 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 508501 ***