Clock applet is more expensive than other clocks!

[Les Mikesell]

On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 18:12 +0100, Keith G. Robertson-Turner wrote:

> > Now the gnome clock is back, and just for fun I compared the cost of
> >  the  clocks.  If I'm reading this ps output correctly, the gnome 
> > clock-applet uses almost 1% of 1gig system memory and it uses 9x as 
> > much as the wmCalClock or wmclock.  Am I reading this right?
> 
> Well you've answered your own query.
> 
> The reason the gnome-clock-applet is so bloated, is because it hooks
> into evolution-data-server libecal.
> 
> Frankly, if it wasn't for Beagle and the clock, I wouldn't have anything
> to do with Evolution on this system - I'd much prefer it that way.

And I thought that was the best thing about FC5... My company has
conference calls all the time to coordinate work across several
offices and the scheduling changes all the time with meeting requests
managed on an exchange server.  I'd never remember them without a
popup at the right time and before this update (which I haven't done
yet...) Evolution was doing those popups at least as well as Outlook.

> I don't use Evolution - I don't want Evolution - but I have to install
> it for it's dependants.

Do you have any scheduled events/reminders?

> Both Evolution and Beagle come from Novell, so I can understand why the
> two are linked, but it's about time that we found some way of replacing
> some of the bloated dependencies for a lot of Fedora components (extras
> or otherwise), either by isolating and modularising those components
> (i.e. libecal) or replacing them with alternatives.

A dummy hook would make sense for people who can keep track of
everything themselves, but I'd like mine to work - and playing a
sound specific to this event would be nice too.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com