From owner-ctm-users@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 17 02:00:39 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ctm-users@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEE2B37B506 for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 02:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D76D43FCB for ; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 02:00:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (Ugrondar@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5H90F1f071933; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:00:15 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)h5H90F7v071932; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:00:15 +0100 (BST) X-Authentication-Warning: storm.FreeBSD.org.uk: Ugrondar set sender to mark@grondar.org using -f Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])h5H8uoHh097154; Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:56:50 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) From: Mark Murray Message-Id: <200306170856.h5H8uoHh097154@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: Bob Bishop In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:28:39 BST." <4.3.2.7.2.20030617092633.0414b758@gid.co.uk> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:56:50 +0100 Sender: mark@grondar.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,FROM_NO_LOWER,IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES version=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: ctm-users@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CTM - any users left? X-BeenThere: ctm-users@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CTM User discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:00:40 -0000 Bob Bishop writes: > Hi, > > Perhaps postmaster@ (CC'd) can tell us how many subscribers ctm-users@ has, > as another data point. I already know that :-). The real datapoint I was looking for was any objections. There were some, mainly of the form "I use it so please keep it in base". Only one so far has been a "hard" objection, the rest have pretty much said "I can see why you want to do this" and "makes sense, cvsup(1) is not in base". M > > At 23:06 16/6/03, Julian Stacey wrote: > >I forwarded Mark's article with changed headers: > >as it seems to me ctm-users@ would be more interested/ affected. > >From > > To: current@freebsd.org > > From: Mark Murray > >To > > To: ctm-users@freebsd.org > > cc: Mark Murray > > bcc: current@freebsd.org > > > >-------- > >Mark Murray wrote: > > > Hi all > > > > > > Last time I looked, we had _very_ few CTM users. > > > > > > Is there any reason that the CTM stuff should not be a port? > > > > > > M > > > -- > > > Mark Murray > > > iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH > > > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > >- > >Julian Stacey Freelance Systems Engineer, Unix & Net Consultant, Munich. > > Ihr Rauchen => mein allergischer Kopfschmerz ! Schnupftabak probieren. > >_______________________________________________ > >freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > -- > Bob Bishop +44 (0)118 977 4017 > rb@gid.co.uk fax +44 (0)118 989 4254 > -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH