[Dovecot] OT - Re: Dovecot 1.1.x and 1.2.x differencies

[Charles Marcus]

On 2010-06-16 7:52 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> The point is that waiting a few days or weeks after a release for the
> other guinea pigs to find the problems doesn't always guarantee you
> won't run into a bug, as I describe above.

True, of course... I think babies should be required to have 'There are
*no* guarantees in life, with one possible exception: you will die some
day.' stamped on their foreheads so they'd see it every time they looked
in a mirror. ;)

> 1.2.10 had been out for quite some time, months IIRC, before Debian
> had a Lenny backport of 1.2.10 available which, I installed as soon
> as it hit the FTP. I found problems and reported them. This was many
> weeks or months after the general release of 1.2.10 IIRC.

Yes - iirc though, yours was a corner case for some reason?

> I actually would prefer a rolling release system for some things.
> The problem as I see it with Debian is they support so darn many
> architectures the sheer weight of compiling all the packages and what
> not prevents them from doing anything stable quickly.

Gentoo supports just as many:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_distributions#Architecture_support

> Debian Stable has been averaging about 2 years between releases. Two
> years is a _LONG_ damn time to wait for a new rev of say, Dovecot.

I know... imo, a formal process for nominating certain critical
applications - like postfix, dovecot, etc - for upgrading to stable
would be a good thing. How often does a postfix update require an update
to gcc or other system libs?

> What's the ETA for the first stable release of Dovecot 2.0? Less
> than 6 months?

Only Timo knows, but just from past experience, yeah, I'd say less...

-- 

Best regards,

Charles