cvs commit: ports/mail/procmail Makefile

Ted Hatfield ted at
Tue Aug 30 19:33:05 UTC 2011

On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Matthias Andree wrote:

> Am 30.08.2011 19:57, schrieb Mark Linimon:
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 07:44:12PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote:
>>> It only warns, it does not prevent fresh installs on systems that don't
>>> have the same port/package already installed.
>> "code, not policy" ... ?
> Well... is _is_ policy and meant as such.  We make decisions for ports
> users all the time, and this is no exception.

If procmail has no ongoing security issues and it compiles and installs 
with no problems what's the reasoning behind removing it from the ports 

As far as I can see the reasoning advocated at this time is that 
procmail hasn't been in active development since 2001.  Shouldn't that 
be seen as a sign of stability.

I'm not a software developer so maybe I'm missing something obvious 
about this situation.  Feel free to educate/convice me that I should 
make the effort to switch from procmail to maildrop.

I've been using procmail now for 16 years and I'm very happy with it's 
performance.  Moving to maildrop would be a significant amount of effort 
for both me and my users.

Ted Hatfield

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list