From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 28 11:20:12 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C8616A4CE for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:20:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from yertle.kcilink.com (yertle.kcilink.com [65.205.34.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A72C243D48 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 11:20:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from vivek@khera.org) Received: from [192.168.7.103] (host-103.int.kcilink.com [192.168.7.103]) by yertle.kcilink.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112DD2178B for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:20:11 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613) Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Apple-Mail-9--357492710" Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Vivek Khera Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:20:05 -0400 To: ports@FreeBSD.org X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 1.0.1 (v33, 10.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.613) Subject: postfix port version numbering -- suggestions wanted X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: ports@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:20:12 -0000 --Apple-Mail-9--357492710 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed During the freeze, postfix 2.1 was released, and postfix 2.2 "development" branch was started. It is fairly self-evident that the postfix-current port should become the 2.2 version. What is not clear is how to handle the transition from the 2.0 to 2.1 as the "release" version. Currently there are three postfix ports: postfix1, postfix, and postfix-current. Obviously, enough people still run postfix 1.x to need a postfix1 port. So my thought is to make a postfix20 port for the now old 2.0 line, and have the postfix port be the 2.1 release. This way people can upgrade as they see fit, and if they have a burning desire to still run 2.0.x, they can. Or is there any point in having a 2.0 sitting about? They're totally backward compatible. What do other postfix users out there think? I'm holding off submitting the PR's until we decide on what to do. Please follow up to the list. I read it. --Apple-Mail-9--357492710 content-type: application/pgp-signature; x-mac-type=70674453; name=PGP.sig content-description: This is a digitally signed message part content-disposition: inline; filename=PGP.sig content-transfer-encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin) iD8DBQFAj/XaBmsZ3mzf/kkRAqoZAKDncULvyvh7KaMF64p5Ai8j8wKCpQCbBu24 AKwi1CXK+vcu+2Z1XX00C7w= =0eD2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail-9--357492710--