FreeBSD port of SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (continued)

[Mathieu Arnold]

+-le 25/09/2004 02:20 -0700, Pat Lashley écrivait :
| --On Saturday, September 25, 2004 08:59:03 +0200 Mathieu Arnold
| <mat at mat.cc> wrote:
| 
|> +-Le 24/09/2004 18:20 -0700, Pat Lashley a dit :
|>| SA 3.0 should probably be a separate port rather than an update
|>| to the existing SA port; due to the lack of backwards compatability
|>| in the API.  For example, it would break the Exim port which by
|>| default includes the ExiScan patches.  (The Exim port would still
|>| build; but the SpamAssassin support would fail at run time.)
|> 
|> I don't think we will keep the old spamassassin. The 2.64 version will be
|> the only one working with 5.005_03, but well... It's not possible to have
|> SA3 work with 5.005_03 (believe me, I tried).
|> So, a few days before committing the SA3 update, I'll send a mail with the
|> patch I plan to commit to maintainers of ports depending on SA264 for them
|> to update/patch/whatever.
| 
| That seems like an awfully short transition period.  Why not
| a separate 3.0 port for a while; with the old one being deprecated?
| Then remove the 2.64 port once the dependant ports have been updated
| and in the field long enough for some serious testing?

I don't want to have a SA3 port, I'm more in favor of a SA264 port designed
for perl 5.005_03 as the databases/p5-DBI-137 port. This is still under
discussion.

-- 
Mathieu Arnold