[Dovecot] Re: dovecot Digest, Vol 32, Issue 42

[Daniel]

If its too hard for them to setup the pop3 catch all, we can probably 
put some mapping in place to smtp froward mail to their server. This is 
more complex on our part so would prefer not to do it that way, but its 
an option and will require not setup on their part other than make sure 
their server does not accept mail for anyone other than our server.

dovecot-request at dovecot.org wrote:
> Send dovecot mailing list submissions to
> 	dovecot at dovecot.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://dovecot.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dovecot
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	dovecot-request at dovecot.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	dovecot-owner at dovecot.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of dovecot digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Re: Dovecot Version Numbers - Let's drop the Alpha? (Marc Perkel)
>    2. Dovecot - struct dqblk' has no member named 'dqb_curblocks
>       (Bob Gustafson)
>    3. Re: Dovecot - struct dqblk' has no member named
>       'dqb_curblocks (Bob Gustafson)
>    4. Re: Dovecot & pam_mkhomedir (Stroller)
>    5. Re: Dovecot Version Numbers - Let's drop the Alpha? (Andy Cravens)
>    6. Re: LDAP schema for mailLocation? (Aiko Barz)
>    7. Authentication trouble. (Michael Peters)
>    8. Re: LDAP schema for mailLocation? (Karl Latiss)
>    9. Re: Dovecot Version Numbers - Let's drop the Alpha?
>       (Erik Petersen)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:26:11 -0800
> From: Marc Perkel <marc at perkel.com>
> Subject: Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot Version Numbers - Let's drop the Alpha?
> To: "Jeff A. Earickson" <jaearick at colby.edu>
> Cc: dovecot at dovecot.org
> Message-ID: <43A2F8B3.8080405 at perkel.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> I'm sure some of my customers would also freak if they knew I was using 
> "Alpha" code. Besides, who expects a 1.0 version to be perfect?
> 
> Jeff A. Earickson wrote:
> 
>> For political reasons, I would like to see alphaX promoted to "1.0".
>> My boss had a cow the other day when I told her we are running alpha
>> code in production.  My defense was "you hadn't noticed because it
>> works."  Or at least call alpha6 something like "beta1" instead.
>>
>> Jeff Earickson
>> Colby College
>>
>> On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Marc Perkel wrote:
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 06:42:09 -0800
>>> From: Marc Perkel <marc at perkel.com>
>>> To: dovecot at dovecot.org
>>> Subject: [Dovecot] Dovecot Version Numbers - Let's drop the Alpha?
>>>
>>> I'd like to make a suggestion. Let's drop the Alpha and come out with 
>>> an official version 1.0.
>>>
>>> Here's my reasons. The 0.9x version are obsolete and people should be 
>>> using the 1.0 Alpha versions which seem to me to do everything the 
>>> previous versions did and more. It's as full featured and stable as 
>>> all other IMAP servers and in my opinion is ready to be called 1.0.
>>>
>>> The "Alpha" label scares people off and with the 0.9x version being 
>>> obsolete I think it creates confusion for new users. It created 
>>> confusion for me when I converted to dovecot, and distros are less 
>>> ,ikely to include versions with the Alpha label.
>>>
>>> Once you go to 1.0 you can start a 1.1 alpha series and finish it up. 
>>> I know Timo has high standards but as a marketing issue I think that 
>>> the Alpha label needs to go to get people to accept and use 1.0 in 
>>> production.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Marc Perkel - marc at perkel.com
>>>
>>> Spam Filter: http://www.junkemailfilter.com
>>>   My Blog: http://marc.perkel.com
>>>
>