> from the answer of Jan P., I would say replacing postfwd v1 shouldn't > happen (yet).
I agree v1 should be kept around. For the reasons Jan P.K. mentioned it will probably make sense to keep both of them in Debian for a while. > Beside that postfwd2 hasn't a upstream tarball, at least I haven't found > one. I don't see one either. > Do you feel, we need postfwd2 in squeeze? I personly wouldn't hammer > postfwd2 into squeeze, cause the testing period would be really short. I think it can wait. I guess tag the bug squeeze-ignore or however that works. Thanks, -- Matt Taggart tagg...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
