From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Jun 5 11:35:33 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from 200-191-157-223-as.acessonet.com.br (200-191-157-223-as.acessonet.com.br [200.191.157.223]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C837D37B6C0 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 11:35:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from lioux@uol.com.br) Received: (qmail 9041 invoked by uid 1001); 5 Jun 2000 17:32:04 -0000 From: lioux@uol.com.br Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:32:04 -0300 To: Will Andrews Cc: FreeBSD Ports , Omachonu Ogali , Ollivier Robert Subject: Re: Postfix upgrade Message-ID: <20000605143204.A9036@Fedaykin.here> References: <20000605130607.C7792@argon.gryphonsoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <20000605130607.C7792@argon.gryphonsoft.com>; from andrews@technologist.com on Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 01:06:07PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 01:06:07PM -0400, Will Andrews wrote: > > If the consensus is that the mail/postfix port should not be upgraded in > this form, then I suggest a different method: we repo-copy mail/postfix > to mail/postfix-devel and upgrade that instead. However, I'd prefer to > avoid repo bloat if possible. > I'd rather have a -devel port so as to avoid further discussion. We would have "stable" and "experimental", no arguments left for anyone to argue. :) Regards, Mario Ferreira To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message