Lars Schimmer writes:
Intereting view for a software poackage taking a few years to get a way to migrate from mailman2 to mailman3. Or in other words: if a stable version is not useable/to old, the software is not production ready.
Not our problem though. It was the distro's choice to provide Mailman packages. We're happy that they're interested, and happy to do what we can to support their users when they come here. But it's up to them to judge whether their packages are useful to their users.
For constantly evolving projects where you need to be current, [distribution packages are] more of a detriment.
Nope. Vote against this view. You need a stable system to rely on and setup without hassle in a nonce.
Then what are you doing here? That is not Mailman 3, as you can see from reading this list. Once working, Mailman 3 is quite stable as long as you understand the parameters (for example, what a shunted message is, and what configurations are available from Postorius and what requires shell access). But it is not yet hassle-free to set up (unless you use Brian's guide on an otherwise empty host ;-). Mailman 3 is still a work in progress, with a wide variety of requirements from our users that only we can address.
And again in <428b33e6-189b-3a13-0bab-b5d77735d8ab@cgv.tugraz.at>:
So, why does someone not care about the debian package to fix that bugs? It is possible, and is done by other packages every day.
Not our problem. Ask the Debian maintainer, who is not a core Mailman developer.
Thats why I like to stay with 1 standard for all softeare packages on one system. I do not want to run 20 software distributions with 20 ways of doing it the right waay (tm).
I doubt anyone disagrees, but yet again, not our problem. Our problem is that y'all choose 20 different software distributions and somebody among you wants to run Mailman on each one of them, embedded in an equally wide variety of network configurations.
You really should be over on some Debian list with this thread. I understand your frustration, but we have no obligation and no intention to do anything about it. We're here to maintain Mailman itself and never said anything else. If the Debian maintainer has specific requests of us, I'm sure all of us would take a strong interest in that. But maintaining the Debian packaging itself is his/her chosen job, not ours.
Steve