Jonathan Marsden wrote: > > On 13 Dec 2002, Jure Pecar writes: > > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:31:41 -0500 Ken Murchison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> I addition to what Rob already mentioned, there needs to be more > >> work done on documenting the virtdomain support and tying some > >> loose ends. > > > Yes, virtdomains are actually the #1 thing i'm interested in cyrus > > 2.2 ... I'm sure there are more people interested, so i think it > > would be nice to provide either a stable, known working cvs branch > > of 2.2 or a patch with a backport of virtdomains stuff to 2.1. I'm > > willing to help here, just give me some directions. > > I would also very much like to see this happen. To get Red Hat 7.x > RPMs of cyrus-imapd with virtdomain support, I grabbed the CVS for 2.2 > as of late September and turned it ito RPMs and since then I have > stuck with that. I'm about to resync with CVS again to pick up the > recent security fixes. But I'd be more comfortable with using a > somewhat supported (or at least officially labelled!) version of the > codebase. > > The issue on when releases happen seems to me to be that CMU has its > own priorities, and tends to stick to them. Which is absolutely fine, > and probably the right thing for them to do. The result is that, even > if a backport patch of the virtdomain code to 2.1.x happens, I'm not > sure it would really help in the supportedness/officialness stakes, > since CMU would not be using it :-) > > So it may be that until CMU finds an internal need for something that > is in 2.2 but not in 2.1, there's little anyone else can do to get > virtdomain support "more official" than it just being there in CVS.
Its not a matter of CMU needing/using virtdomain support. CMU is not using altnamespace or unixhiersep stuff in 2.1, and that was released. What gets developed has a lot to do with what CMU needs/wants, but releases are usually based on code quality/stability and time. 2.2 has a lot of other changes (NNTP support, new config option architecture, config options for stuff in lib/, restructured ANNOTATEMORE code, etc) which need more testing and documentation. IIRC, Rob is targeting some time in mid/late January for a 2.2.0 release. > So the question becomes: what, if anything can non-CMU people do that > would help cause a release of 2.2 (or 2.1 with virtdomains in it??) to > happen sooner rather than later? 2.1 w/virtdomain definitely won't happen, at least not "officially" without some kind of incentive to do so. -- Kenneth Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd. Software Engineer 21 Princeton Place 716-662-8973 x26 Orchard Park, NY 14127 --PGP Public Key-- http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp
