Bug 988956
Summary: | status of exim maintanence? | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora EPEL | Reporter: | Dario Landazuri <dario> |
Component: | exim | Assignee: | Mark Chappell <tremble> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | el6 | CC: | dario, dwmw2, jskarvad, tremble |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2013-07-26 21:08:25 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Dario Landazuri
2013-07-26 19:12:04 UTC
(In reply to Dario Landazuri from comment #0) Hi, as a exim co-maintainer I can say that the 4.80 is already in the Fedora 18 and up. The security patches (those with assigned CVEs) are actively backported to the EPEL. The rebases are not recommended by the EPEL guidelines, but IMHO it shouldn't break things in this case. I let the decision on the maintainer. Jaroslav - that's good enough for me. I wouldn't mind going up to 4.80, but I also don't need you guys to go against guidelines for no real reason. Thanks for the reply - I'll give it a whirl and see what happens. I'll think about filing an RFE for going up to 4.80 just in case it's possible. As far as I'm concerned, I think you guys can close this. OK, closing, feel free to open RFE. |