Debian packages of cyrus 2.3 series

[Bron Gondwana]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 09:43:31 -0500, "Benjamin Seidenberg" <benjamin at debian.org> said:
> Bron Gondwana wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone is looking at packaging the 2.3 series of Cyrus for Debian?
> >   
> 
> It has been packaged and is currently in experimental.

Excellent.  I'll find myself a chroot environment somewhere and pull them down.

> > It has been considered "stable" for the past few revisions (since 2.3.7 I think, which
> > I would agree with - the patches I've been pushing since then have been less "critical")
> >   
> 
> I was not aware it was considered stable yet. However, the debian
> packages still need a bit more attention before they can leave
> experimental. Sadly, many members on the team haven't had much time to
> work on it lately.

Hmm, you're right, the webpage still says:

http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/downloads.html#imap

  "The latest testing release of the IMAP server is 2.3.9 ...
   The latest stable release of the IMAP server is 2.2.12..."

Odd.  The release note for 2.3.10 said:

http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/2007-October/027324.html

  "I am pleased to announce the release of Cyrus IMAPd 2.3.10.  This 
   release should be considered production quality."

I guess there's a difference between "stable" and "production quality" :)

> > I also have this very nice set of skiplist robustifying patches I'm pushing to everyone
> > who will listen to me right now :)  We've been having occasional skiplist issues for all
> > the time I've been with FastMail, and it's only this weekend that I've finally sat down
> > and come to terms with the code enough to fix them!
> >   
> Feel free to submit them to the Debian bug tracking system.

Mostly I'm trying to push them back to upstream instead, but I'll have a chat with
Ken and see if he wants to push a new 2.2 series with this patch or if I should
send them directly to package maintainers.

> > Every so often I do talk about becoming a Debian developer, but never seem to quite make
> > the time... I maintain a pile of packages (backports and locally patched things) for our
> > own infrastructure, but they're in various states of "just make it work for us" that
> > doesn't necessarily match the FHS.  I'd certainly be happy to help out with packaging
> > and testing for the packages we use.  (Cyrus we'll never be using vanilla upstream I
> > don't think.  Even now my patches series is 20 items long, and I got lots of stuff
> > into 2.3.10!)
> >   
> Feel free to test and report bugs against both the 2.2 and 2.3 packages.

I don't know that I'll do to much with 2.2 - it doesn't support replication so is somewhat
of a dead-end to us.  We were running more recent CVS even before I started at FastMail.

Regards,

Bron.
-- 
  Bron Gondwana
  brong at fastmail.fm