mail/mailman v3?
Julian H. Stacey
jhs at berklix.com
Fri May 1 01:32:07 UTC 2020
Matthias Andree wrote:
> Am 29.04.20 um 17:00 schrieb Julian H. Stacey:
> > Greg Veldman wrote ports@:
> >> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 01:02:14PM -0700, Chris wrote:
> >>> It also wouldn't be that difficult to simply modify mailman(2)
> >>> to adopt the py3.x language changes.
> >>
> >> To simply make it work, perhaps not. To make it work well and
> >> be reliable... might be more difficult than you think. A large
> >> chunk of what a mail handler of any variety does is text
> >> processing, and there are significant differences in that area
> >> in Python2 vs Python3. E.g. ASCII vs Unicode. You'd likely
> >> be opening a Pandora's box of corner cases and workarounds when
> >> $STUPIDLY_FORMATTED_MAIL_MESSAGE_OF_THE_HOUR comes through.
> >>
> >> The effort would probably be better spent enhancing Mailman3,
> >> since that's the future of the project anyway.
> >>
> >> Also, as someone that's been a Mailman site admin on installs
> >> of various sizes for about the past 20 years, I'm sort of looking
> >> forward to the promises of some of the little quirks of Mailman2
> >> getting some love. ;-)
> >
> > Hi ports@
> >
> > This may be tangential to aboveon python versions, but:
> > ports/mail/mailman supports Mailman2.
> > Mailman2 & Mailman3 are very different.
> >
> > Even if it's possible to bend ports/mail/mailman to support Mailman3
> > Please do not do it; keep it clean for just Mailman2
> > (Else it would cause big run time problems for user admins (inc. me)).
> >
> > Any who will want Mailman3 should please clone ports/mail/mailman to
> > ports/mail/mailman3 (not ports/mail/mailman2) & work there. Thanks
>
> Julian,
>
> and adding portmgr@ in bcc:
>
> mailman 3 says on the tin that it is a DIFFERENT product, different
> codebase (rewritten from scratch), different and modular architecture,
> everything. No shared code with mailman 2.
>
> So I, as mail/mailman maintainer, propose:
>
> - NO "svn copy". mailman 3 will be a new port and that must be
> reflected in the repo. No descendence => no svn copy.
>
> - NO rename. We should NOT rename mail/mailman (2.x) to .../mailman2
> because mailman 3 is NOT a 1:1 replacement for mailman 2.
>
> As current maintainer of the mail/mailman port, I am planning along the
> two points above.
>
>
> Re Python 2.x EOL, if someone made a Tauthon port (yeah portmgr@ yell me
> down for writing that thought), and we can still get mailman 2.1.x
> security updates, we might give it a spin on Tauthon 2.8 instead of
> Python 2.7 to have something in the interim while mailman 3 matures.
Thanks Mathias, sounds fine, leave it to you :-)
PS I've not the foggiest what Tauthon is , so searched
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Tauthon&go=Go&ns0=1
The page "Tauthon" does not exist.
cd /usr/ports ; cd */*tauthon* # */*tauthon*: No match.
https://forums.freebsd.org/tags/tauthon/-
Cheers
--
Julian Stacey, Consultant Systems Engineer, BSD Linux http://berklix.com/jhs/
http://www.berklix.org/corona/#masks 150 Euro fine or tie 2 handkerchiefs ?
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-52304821 Brexit Dec. 2020 will hit UK more.
More information about the freebsd-ports
mailing list