Hi Guys, I, as the upstream maintainer, strongly support option 1, that is to drop supporting multiple instances of stunnel. My rationale is:
1. It breaks systemd integration (verbosely discussed in this thread).
2. It is no longer useful after the "include" configuration file option
was introduced.
3. My long-term plan for stunnel is to introduce "stunnelctl" (similar
to "apachectl") to control the daemon. This tool will not support
multiple instances of stunnel anyway.
It would be great to have it in Debian stretch...
Best regards,
Mike
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
