Kris Deugau writes: > > Per Jessen wrote: > > So the question is - what is the need for maintaining 2.64? > > Little to none, IMO. I'm baffled by what people are doing to their poor > servers to make them break the way I constantly see reported on this > list and elsewhere. <g> > > > Show of hands, > > who's still on 2.64 with no exact plans to upgrade? > > Here; 3 systems. I have no reason to upgrade at the moment because > everything's working Just Fine Thanks. Also, 3.0x has been reported to > be more of a resource hog than 2.x, and one system is near its limits > (although MTA-level RBLs rave dropped the spam rate to ~4:1 from ~10:1 > spam:ham, and the message volume has gone down by a factor of ~5). > Here: One system.
Pretty much the same logic as Kris. I'm loathe to fix what doesn't seem to be broken.
