[gentoo-dev] death to mailer-config/mailwrapper

[gentoo-dev] death to mailer-config/mailwrapper

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 760 bytes --]

A bit over two years ago, some developers set out to get debian's
concept of mailerwrapper ('alternatives' for mail). Ever since then,
there have been a number of package.masks for various MTAs, and
the need to carry them forward.

mailer-config/mailwrapper have not been touched for 2/1 years
respectively. If it's going to remain masked, can we just get rid of it
entirely?

It was a good idea, but it just never took off, I think mainly because
it required too many changes to MTAs, and also did not provide for one
of the original goals - running two disparate MTAs on the same box.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy
E-Mail     : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 321 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] death to mailer-config/mailwrapper

[Josh Saddler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 710 bytes --]

Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> A bit over two years ago, some developers set out to get debian's
> concept of mailerwrapper ('alternatives' for mail). Ever since then,
> there have been a number of package.masks for various MTAs, and
> the need to carry them forward.
> 
> mailer-config/mailwrapper have not been touched for 2/1 years
> respectively. If it's going to remain masked, can we just get rid of it
> entirely?
> 
> It was a good idea, but it just never took off, I think mainly because
> it required too many changes to MTAs, and also did not provide for one
> of the original goals - running two disparate MTAs on the same box.
> 

Aye, death to them!

Well, I don't use 'em anyway.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] death to mailer-config/mailwrapper

[Grant Goodyear]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 747 bytes --]

Robin H. Johnson wrote: [Fri Nov 02 2007, 08:35:50PM CDT]
> It was a good idea, but it just never took off, I think mainly because
> it required too many changes to MTAs, and also did not provide for one
> of the original goals - running two disparate MTAs on the same box.

The mailwrapper program is only intended to allow users to have two MTAs
_installed_ on the same box, not actually have them both running
simultaneously.  It works pretty well for that, but I agree that there
seems to be little real need for it.  I have no objection to it going
away.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear	
Gentoo Developer
g2boojum@gentoo.org
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]