On 2024/05/06 20:06, Omar Polo wrote:
> sorry for the delay,
>
> On 2024/05/02 12:30:20 +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > Personally I would have done this as a plain removal of the old packages
> > and ask people (via current.html and quirks obsolete_reason) to remove
> > the old ones themselve
sorry for the delay,
On 2024/05/02 12:30:20 +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> Personally I would have done this as a plain removal of the old packages
> and ask people (via current.html and quirks obsolete_reason) to remove
> the old ones themselves, then EPOCH stuff can be avoided in the new
> po
Personally I would have done this as a plain removal of the old packages
and ask people (via current.html and quirks obsolete_reason) to remove
the old ones themselves, then EPOCH stuff can be avoided in the new
ports, and we don't end up with a not-really-useful meta package lying
around (i.e. a s
On 2024/04/30 16:10:28 +0200, Omar Polo wrote:
> With the upcoming change in the transport layer for the tables, we've
> also taken the chance to split them into separate repositories.
>
> The idea is to remove the current opensmtpd-extra-* packages and import
> the new set of opensmtpd-table-* p
With the upcoming change in the transport layer for the tables, we've
also taken the chance to split them into separate repositories.
The idea is to remove the current opensmtpd-extra-* packages and import
the new set of opensmtpd-table-* packages (in the tarball attached.)
The queue, schedulers
