also sprach Marco Nenciarini <[email protected]> [2011.08.17.1045 +0200]: > It's easy to upload the current dovecot package to backports, but > I'm afraid to do it, because it doesn't handle the configuration > update at all.
I have not looked at Dovecot 2.x at all yet, but what's the deal on the configuration update? If 1.x→2.x cannot be automated, then it is questionable that dovecot 2.x was uploaded under the same source package name (instead of e.g. dovecot2). Now we have to decide how we can fix the situation. I understand why you are hesitant about uploading the backport, but that won't make the problem go away — it just postpones it for some users to the next Debian stable release. > I'm also not convinced about how the packages manage their mutual > dependencies, but I haven't the resources to work on it just now. What do you mean with this? Are there already backports packages of Dovecot 2.x that I could inspect, or should I make my own? -- .''`. martin f. krafft <[email protected]> Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. but my how we improve the score, as we practice more and more." -- sir walter scott
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)
