On Thu, 23 May 1996, Ian Kluft wrote:
> If things keep going the way they look like they have (with no activity in
> the smail development lists because everyone went to Exim) then I think it
> may be time before you go beta to nominate Exim to be Smail 4.
I deliberately didn't want to use the same name, in order to avoid
confusion.
> After all, none of the previous major releases of Smail had any significant
> relation to each other either.
... which (IMHO) caused confusion! I came in at Smail 3, but even so got
a bit confused when Smail 2 got mentioned on the net. I think Smail 3
has spread wider than Smail 2, so (again IMHO) there is much more scope
for confusion this time.
> At least in this case there is a big overlap in the participants.
Yes, but I'm seeing new interest, particularly here in the UK where
people want to move away from PP.
--
Philip Hazel University Computing Service,
ph10@??? New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
P.Hazel@??? England. Phone: +44 1223 334714
