Re: Qmail

[Christian Hudon <chudon@ee.mcgill.ca>]

On Sat, 14 Dec 1996, Christoph Lameter wrote:

> On Sun, 15 Dec 1996, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> 
> liw >A qmail-package like netscape-package might be appropriate.
> liw >
> liw >OTOH, I've been led to understand that the qmail authors don't
> liw >really want it to be distributed in any form until it's finished
> liw >(version 1.0). While it certainly sounds like a really, really
> liw >good program (compared to security-hole-per-week sendmail), perhaps
> liw >we should be polite and wait for the final release? Or at least
> liw >ask the authors if they oppose a packager package.
> 
> Could the qmail expert in our midst advise us?

Since I'm the person whose name is besides 'qmail' in the "list of
prospective Debian packages", I guess I'd better answer this one.

I've been following qmail since 0.74 and I've had it packaged up since
0.90, but Dan (qmail's author) didn't want qmail to be redistributed
before 1.0, mostly because there was still one major change (qmail-users,
implemented in 0.92, if memory serves) coming up.

Since it appears that the license terms for version >= 1.0 will be free
enough to let qmail be included in the main Debian distribution, and since
1.0 is coming up real quick now (i.e. probably one more gamma release,
then 1.0), I decided to wait for 1.0 . And for the reasons given above, I
really don't think it's worth the extra trouble (for both the maintainer
and the users of the package) to build a qmail-package package now. 

   Christian



--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com