[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Official Exim 4 package

On Sat, 2003-03-22 at 21:49, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 03:16:14PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 00:11:18 -0600 "Jamin W. Collins"
> > <jcollins@asgardsrealm.net> wrote:
> > > 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.
> > 
> > Which I addressed by asking "Do we really need to start putting the
> > version number in the package name now, IE exim4?" which you deleted.
> Because my response was not related to it.  But since you seem to really
> want me to address it, I see no problem with major changes like this
> taking this route.  It allows the end user to choose what /they/ want.

Just a quick interjection - the situation would appear comparable to
that of Bind (version 8) and Bind9 (not version 8) - a relatively clear
and apparently broadly accepted solution to packaging a noticeably
different successor system.
ML Kahnt New Markets Consulting
Tel: (613) 531-8684 / (613) 539-0935
Email: kahnt@hosehead.dyndns.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: