[Dovecot] Dovecot 1.1.x and 1.2.x differencies
CMarcus at Media-Brokers.com
Wed Jun 16 14:29:10 EEST 2010
On 2010-06-16 1:15 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Charles Marcus put forth on 6/15/2010 12:44 PM:
>> Waiting almost always keeps me from any major bugs from new packages
>> (one exception was a minor update to mailman that changed directory
>> locations), and still lets me stay up to date with the latest stable
> I waited "forever" to get hold of 1.2.10 in the form of the backport for
> Debian Lenny, which was the first 1.2.x backport available IIRC (I hate
> installing apps from source for many reasons).
Again - this is why I have never been inclined to even give debian a
try... with gentoo, with a very few minor exceptions, the most I've ever
had to wait was a few weeks...
> Once I installed it I almost immediately found problems with
> performance. I reported the symptoms here, and within a day or two
> Timo identified the cause relating to mbox processing and fixed it.
> It took a couple/three weeks IIRC before the 1.2.11 backport with
> this fix was available. I installed it and it fixed my problems
What does this have to do with sticking with 'really stable' 1.1.x? You
do realize that 1.1.x had any number of similar situations with certain
> I agree with Charles' logic in most cases, but as shown above, not
> all cases.
> Broken functionality issues are identified and fixed rather quickly
> as they usually hit multiple OPs simultaneously.
I am *always* prepared to roll back to a previous non-broken version in
the case of an upgrade gone bad.
We are not in disagreement, we just apparently do things differently. I
prefer the 'rolling release' type of system that always has *everything*
reasonably up to date, and gentoo gives me that.
More information about the dovecot