mail/policyd name conflict

[Anton Berezin]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 08:08:10PM +1100, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 09:49:11AM +0100, Anton Berezin wrote:
> > So I'd like to suggest to rename the existing mail/policyd to
> > mail/policyd-spf, for example.  It might be a good idea to rename the
> > new port to mail/policyd-somethingelse anyway, if we can come up with a
> > sufficiently descriptive (and short!) "somethingelse" part.
> 
> I would call them
>     mail/postfix-policyd
>     mail/postfix-policyd-spf
> 
> But that is what you said already.

More or less, but yes, the postfix- prefix is even better.

> If there are getting more which just are described as postfix
> "policyd" ports, just call them postfix-policyd-a, postfix-policyd-b
> and so on.

Well we already have mail/postgrey and mail/sqlgrey, which also use
policy daemon mechanism.  I would hate to rename them to
mail/postfix-policyd-greylist-db and mail/postfix-policyd-greylist-sql,
though.  :-)

\Anton.
-- 
The moronity of the universe is a monotonically increasing function. --
Jarkko Hietaniemi