Bug 460332
| Summary: | Alpine 2.00 is released, can we get updates for F8 and F9? | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Gilbert Sebenste <sebenste> |
| Component: | alpine | Assignee: | Joshua Daniel Franklin <joshuadfranklin> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 8 | CC: | asheesh, jima, mspevack, rdieter |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | http://www.washington.edu/alpine/ | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2008-09-24 23:58:41 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 465341 | ||
|
Description
Gilbert Sebenste
2008-08-27 16:27:26 UTC
Funny you should mention that. I was working on building it just this morning. :) other alpine maintainer dudes, any objections to building this too for F-8/F-9 soonish? Funny thing is, on their website, they have a binary built on Fedora Core 7, which is, of course, EOL'd. I'd be happy to test it. Er, I mean I'd be happy to test an F8 version. :-) Go ahead Rex. Unfortunately the Alpine dev team is also EOL'd (now unemployed), so I wouldn't expect too many updates to their F7 build platform. JDF: YIKES! :-o ok, I'll do the builds. Joshua, do you know any more details about UW's plans wrt uw-imap/alpine? Is it worth considering forking/hosting it elsewhere? (I know Mark Crispin is already developing a currently non-oss fork). I am going to add Debian alpine maintainer Asheesh Laroia to this bug to get his input on whether to stay with UW alpine as well. I believe he adds the maildir patches that were not popular with MRC, who is a brilliant but opinionated person. Based on past mailing list activity, I do not believe MRC would open-source his code unless told to by an employer. As for the UW's plans, I basically only know what's been on the mailing lists, which is not much. The Alpine 2.00 announcement states: "Version 2.00 also marks the transition of the Alpine Messaging Team's role of direct, active development to one more oriented toward supporting community driven development. The team intends to continue hosting source, coordinating and consulting on contributed fixes and additions, and packaging periodic releases." I do not know if this means actual commit access or not. For the short term I vote for staying with the official UW alpine and not forking. Asheesh, is that your plan? I might as well post this here too: Basically, UW's central IT group (formerly called CAC, now UW Technology) is in a financial mess. There are a lot of rumors going on around campus but the basic story is here: http://techwag.com/index.php/2008/05/21/major-screw-up-changing-industry-leads-to-university-of-washington-tech-workers-layoffs/ (From what I've heard, the first comment is well informed.) A lot of people still use pine on campus, but it's almost all faculty/staff. About half of students forward their email elsewhere, and most of the rest use WebPine. So I guess the logical choice was to sunset development. You have to at least temporarily subscribe at http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/techsupport to read this, but there is a little more info at https://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/private/techsupport/2008-August/010801.html builds for testing: F-8: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=60473 F-9: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=60471 (tested locally fine) alpine-2.00-1.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/alpine-2.00-1.fc8 Works for me. Thanks for doing this, Rex! Take care. Hi, I'm the Debian alpine maintainer. First, thanks to Joshua for those links. Secondly, we're not shipping (nor plan to ship) Eduardo Chappa's Maildir patches. I WISH I could! But he hasn't been willing to license them at all, so right now they're (C) Eduardo Chappa, All Rights Reserved. Naturally that would be undistributable in Debian, so I can't ship that. The old package ships some pretty lame Maildir patches from 10 years that I've been urged *not* to include. Those are licensed under the BSD license (without advertising clause). This situation saddens me. Thirdly, as far as the future: if there is a fork of alpine, I will be very interested to see where it goes, and I am open to shipping it instead of UW-branded alpine. But there is no such fork now, so I find discussion of it premature. Hopefully we can all just work with UW. I lean toward shipping official bits, but at the point where upstream is not very active, I'm open to changing which group I consider "upstream." alpine-2.00-1.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update alpine'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-7290 alpine-2.00-1.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |