From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Apr 28 12:12:14 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 14BE116A4CE
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from panther.mmj.dk (panther.mmj.dk [62.79.83.143])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98AD543D39
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mmj@mmj.dk)
Received: by panther.mmj.dk (Postfix, from userid 500)
	id F3D41F30D4; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 21:12:11 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 21:12:11 +0200
From: Mads Martin Joergensen <mmj@mmj.dk>
To: ports@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040428191211.GD6618@panther.mmj.dk>
References: <AC962F6D-9940-11D8-B6E4-000A9578CFCC@khera.org>
	<200404281158.06331.ringworm@inbox.lv>
	<1A15A1DC-9947-11D8-B6E4-000A9578CFCC@khera.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1A15A1DC-9947-11D8-B6E4-000A9578CFCC@khera.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Subject: Re: postfix port version numbering -- suggestions wanted
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 19:12:14 -0000

* Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org> [Apr 28. 2004 21:06]:
> >My opinion is just as long as there is a stable postfix in 
> >mail/postfix ( no
> >version number ) I could care less if there are also mail/postfix1
> >mail/postfix3 etc...
> 
> I guess I'm more looking to see if people would need a postfix20 port 
> for whatever reason they have to stick to that version.

It might make sense to keep it around for some time, since Wietse did
release 2.0.20 when he released 2.1.0. But let postfix be the 2.1.0
version, and stick the 2.0 version in a postfix20 port.

Speaking of postfix-2.1. I know of a free software company that used 2.1
on their main MX for +6 weeks now. It's been a very good experience,
with several improvements over 2.0.x

-- 
Mads Martin Joergensen, http://mmj.dk
"Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic
 and totally illogical, with just a little bit more effort?"
                                -- A. P. J.