Re: Official Exim 4 package
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 09:08:49PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 15:47:35 -0600 Jamin Collins
> <jcollins@asgardsrealm.net> wrote:
> > Couldn't they just package 4.x as exim4 and leave 3.x as is for
> > those already using it? Then if someone installs 4.x, display
> > several warnings about config file compatibility and such.
>
> Problem is a lot of people ignore those warnings. That's because most
> of the time the warning is meaningless in that they warn people of a
> config file change that could cause problems and in 99.9% of the time
> it doesn't. It leads to the "yeah, yeah, whatever" syndrome.
Doesn't mean the warning couldn't/shouldn't be given.
> Also since Exim is a base package a little more care has to go into it.
Not so. "exim" is a base package. That doesn't mean that "exim4" would
have to be a base package. It would just be another _optional_ package.
> If it were an optional package sure, they could do that. However an upgrade
> of a base package can cause serious problems if not handled properly.
It need not be structured as an upgrade of a base package.
--
Jamin W. Collins
Reply to: