Procmail got updated!
Ted Hatfield
ted at io-tx.com
Sat Dec 23 16:42:38 UTC 2017
On Sat, 23 Dec 2017, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Am 23.12.2017 um 08:12 schrieb Kevin Oberman:
>>
>> So, why does Eugene's question have no relevance to the procmail
>> case? Could you please explain?
>
> Because I am not willing to discuss generics when we have a specific
> case of port at hand.
> The attempted generalization distracts from that, and I insinuate that
> distraction is the purpose.
> Everyone is free to start a new thread about general port maintenance
> and removal principles.
>
I think the best reason to keep procmail available in ports is that
there are still quite a number of people still using it.
In fact opensource.com has an article dated 11/01/2017 titled:
SpamAssassin, MIMEDefang, and Procmail: Best Trio of 2017
https://opensource.com/article/17/11/spamassassin-mimedefang-and-procmail
Not necessarily an argument for code safety but a good argument that it's
still being used by quite a number of people.
I think that as long as someone is willing to patch the software when
vulnerabilities come up we should keep the port available.
Ted Hatfield
More information about the freebsd-ports
mailing list