-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Dick Davies wrote:

>My point was that I don't understand why you should mess with the base
>install - which affects everybody - for the sake of a package that not
>everybody uses?

Actually, there has previously been _no_ released base install which 
used the name `spamd' to refer to `pfspamd'.  In contrast, there has 
been a released `spamassassin' package since August of 2002, and it has 
been released as part of no fewer than _seven_ pkgsrc release branches.

So users of our released products already have access to a `spamd' and 
know what it is.  That's why the program which OpenBSD calls `spamd' is 
now installed as `pfspamd' on NetBSD.


>If you want to avoid naming confliicts, I'd say it would have been saner
>to call spamassassin sa-spamd a la FreeBSD, and just stick something in 
>mail/spamassassin/MESSAGE advising of the potential name conflict.

Again, we have shipped _seven_ releases of pkgsrc in which spamassassin 
includes a daemon named `spamd'.  These releases have a _lot_ more users 
than pfspamd does, and they use pkgsrc on a lot more OS platforms than 
just NetBSD, as well.


>Then all affected users get warned without renaming a core app.

We have never shipped a release with this software.  Thus, it is not 
being `renamed', it is being `named'

- -- 
				Jim Wise
				jwise@draga.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCW/xxpRpI6SYACmIRAkLFAJ9jniW/n4DvRCSoJj1Uh4JdiMjUIgCfQboO
K/PnWHbF+P/66sYXvjp9Wm0=
=+LOM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----