On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 13:50, Phil Pennock <pdp@???> wrote:
> On 2011-05-19 at 09:58 +0000, Ian Eiloart wrote:
> > But no, I don't see a sign of 5.0, or even discussion of what
> > desirable radical changes would justify a major version number change.
> > It might just be that we run out of minor version numbers!
>
> From the June 2010 maintainers meet-up summary notes (excuse long lines
> please):
>
> ----------------------------8< cut here >8------------------------------
> Release:
> * No major new release, universal consensus
> * No fixed schedule for releases
> * Aim for at least one every six months, with "go with what
> we have" if we have been idle
> * Don't break lexical comparison, not going 4.9901
> * So will go from 4.99 to 5.00
> * might jump ahead to 5.00 release after a new queuing system or
> another major new feature
> * consensus that if we go for separate queue directories, backwards
> compat will be a Perl script for re-merging queues
> * no on-disk format changes, just need re-merge
> * consensus that full 8BITMIME support is needed and we should bite
> the bullet (and we're unhappy)
> * regular spool file remains unmolested, auxilliary spool
> file with down-conversion created on demand and
> unlinked as needed; if down-convert on-fly, omit SIZE
> ----------------------------8< cut here >8------------------------------
>
>
Jakob, see?
Exim-5.00 (Codename Hazel) is not that far away. Could even take less than 6
years if some gifted hackers were paid to bring in the major changes
required to get there.
Can't we, the Exim community, raise funds to get some of us to do this new
queuing system? If such initiative can be realized, I am so in it!
--
Best regards,
Odhiambo WASHINGTON,
Nairobi,KE
+254733744121/+254722743223
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I can't hear you -- I'm using the scrambler.
