Unfortunately, the first notice that qmail is being deprecated for netqmail is in this week's *draft* GWN. Consider this a courtesy "I'm working on it, don't panic" bug, and also the places where the qmail folks can post on what needs changing. Seems that the binary name and directory names stay the same, such as /var/qmail/, but some functionality has changed. Note that netqmail is stable on all arches, so let's get the migration done now, before the March deadline. Also CCing hansmi for comment on how the new netqmail will change things. Can you please give our qmail docs a review? Here are the ones that might need some considerable changing: /doc/en/home-router-howto.xml /doc/en/security/shb-logging.xml /doc/en/qmail-howto.xml The rest are minor cosmetic fixes: /doc/en/virt-mail-howto.xml docs-team: what about the filename itself? Should we change metadoc.xml to reflect the new package name, too? I could do all the languages in one go, if need be, as it's just a filename change (and I would love to help out our translators). :)
> Also CCing hansmi for comment on how the new netqmail will change things. Can > you please give our qmail docs a review? Here are the ones that might need some > considerable changing: > > /doc/en/home-router-howto.xml > /doc/en/security/shb-logging.xml > /doc/en/qmail-howto.xml Bleh, forgot to add: /doc/en/security/shb-perms.xml /doc/en/security/shb-mounting.xml /doc/en/security/shb-services
(In reply to comment #0) > docs-team: what about the filename itself? Should we change metadoc.xml to > reflect the new package name, too? I could do all the languages in one go, if > need be, as it's just a filename change (and I would love to help out our > translators). :) Please don't. There are no advantages that I'm aware of and a list of cons would be quite long, starting with broken links from other sites.
(In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #0) > > docs-team: what about the filename itself? Should we change metadoc.xml to > > reflect the new package name, too? I could do all the languages in one go, if > > need be, as it's just a filename change (and I would love to help out our > > translators). :) > > Please don't. There are no advantages that I'm aware of and a list of cons > would be quite long, starting with broken links from other sites. <guide link="/doc/en/qmail-howto.xml" redirect="/doc/en/netqmail-howto.xml"> would do the trick, but I still don't see any reason to rename the file. It's still qmail after all.
(In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #3) Thanks for the feedback; no filename changes will be made.
Created attachment 112341 [details, diff] home-router-howto.xml.patch Proposed patch for home-router-howto.xml. Pretty much just s/qmail/netqmail, though I also noticed that the ebuild foo config command was outdated, so I changed it to emerge --config netqmail. Are the proposed changes acceptable, or are there any more commands I need to change?
Created attachment 112362 [details, diff] qmail-howto.xml.patch Proposed changes for qmail-howto.xml (the big one). Note that these were identical to the changes for home-router-howto: s/qmail/netqmail, plus emerge --config netqmail. If these changes are okay, they are trivial enough that I can do them for the other languages without the need to revbump everything, that way all docs are on the same page, and it saves the translators wear and tear. Status report: all other qmail references are done, including for the translated docs, so all that needs doing now is committing these changes for home-router-howto and qmail-howto, upon review and approval by the qmail guys (and the GDP of course).
(In reply to comment #5) > Proposed patch for home-router-howto.xml. Pretty much just s/qmail/netqmail, > though I also noticed that the ebuild foo config command was outdated, so I > changed it to emerge --config netqmail. > > Are the proposed changes acceptable, or are there any more commands I need to > change? Is there a reason why you don't use the package's category name? Like "emerge mail-mta/netqmail". It's very unlikely netqmail will be moved.
(In reply to comment #6) > Created an attachment (id=112362) [edit] > qmail-howto.xml.patch > > Proposed changes for qmail-howto.xml (the big one). Looks good so far.
(In reply to comment #7) > Is there a reason why you don't use the package's category name? Like "emerge > mail-mta/netqmail". It's very unlikely netqmail will be moved. Generalyl speaking, we don't use category names unless it's to avoid conflict with an existing package, as category names usually aren't necessary for emerging. Plus, the doc already used "emerge qmail", no category. And I prefer brevity. :) But if you like, I can add that in. Other than that, is it okay to commit the changes?
(In reply to comment #9) > Generalyl speaking, we don't use category names unless it's to avoid conflict > with an existing package, as category names usually aren't necessary for > emerging. Plus, the doc already used "emerge qmail", no category. And I prefer > brevity. :) On my system, using mail-mta/netqmail is a few milliseconds faster. :-) > But if you like, I can add that in. Leave it as it is. > Other than that, is it okay to commit the changes? Yes.
Fixed in CVS. Thanks to all the feedback from the GDP and from hansmi -- I never knew that adding the category names makes Portage works faster. ;) (Note: for qmail-howto and home-router-howto, I went with the standard revbump to let the translators work with this bug, as I think the changes were a little more substantial than in the other documents.)
