Date: Fri, 01 May 2020 03:31:34 +0200 From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com> To: Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD Ports <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>, Greg Veldman <freebsd@gregv.net>, ports-committers <ports-committers@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: mail/mailman v3? Message-ID: <202005010131.0411VYl9083901@fire.js.berklix.net> In-Reply-To: Your message "Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:22:02 %2B0200." <d49d7f3f-fe7e-09a8-bbe1-4c4ce7a376b3@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?202005010131.0411VYl9083901>