Re: It is obvious

From: Jenni Baier <jenni_at_renewed.net_at_hypermail-project.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 19:36:52 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990204192338.21048K-100000_at_pneuma.freshwind.com>

On Thu, 4 Feb 1999, Byron C. Darrah wrote:

> > Hi
> >
> > I'd like to see a new project maintainer for Hypermail 2. Five long months
> > have passed since the previous version was announced from Kent and he hasn't
> > even posted more than a few mails during that time.
> >
> > I think Kent has made a great job and put a lot of effort into this, but to
> > make hypermail move on I strongly urge that we find new ways of making
> > progress. We can't just sit and wait for Kent forever.
>
> Yep, I agree with Daniel and the others. One suggestion, though: the
> new project should not be called "hypermail" unless Kent gives express
> consent. It should probably be called something similar, to show it's
> origin, but different enough that it would not cause confusion
> if Kent or someone ever releases a new version of hypermail.
>
> Has anyone got any ideas what we could call it?
>
> ("WebberMail"? :-)

Well, I thought the point was that the "official" development of hypermail needed to be passed off... not that a new "strain" of hypermail needed to be created. There are, without a doubt, many "strains" out there that have been modified and/or improved by different people already.

--jenni baier Received on Fri 05 Feb 1999 03:42:38 AM GMT