similar to: oh, and status of 1.0?

hi list, i'm in the process of testing dovecot before a hopeful switchover from uw-imap/qpopper to dovecot, primarily to get off of the uw-imap/mbox combo and moved to Maildir. i think we've worked out the logistics to avoid any service downtime, with only a short window of a few minutes per user for when we convert from mbox to maildir format. however, during testing a few issues have

This should have gone to stable@ also.... -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Release Engineering Status Report Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 23:48:54 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@FreeBSD.org> To: current@FreeBSD.org All, I'd like to give a status report for 4.x and 5.x for the developers and users who didn't attend the DevSummit this past weekend. 4.9: The 4.9 release is

Hi. I am a little unclear about the ARM JIT support status. Is it working as of LLVM 3.1? If not, is it on the roadmap for LLVM 3.2? I am not currently interested in NEON support so if thats unimplemented, thats fine. thanks, Rahul

I was wondering whether there is a roadmap for adding SMTPUTF8 support to Dovecot? My delivery pattern is Postfix -> Dovecot LMTP and it is choking on utf8 messages. I might be able to volunteer some of my time as a developer. Another thread about this seemed to go unanswered: http://dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2016-September/105474.html

I'm wondering where things are on the roadmap for klibc and initramfs/early userspace. When will everything be harmonized with the kernel and be the default? What is left to do? I'm in my own little world, but I have a pretty good klibc/hotplug/udev/kinit early userspace that just works (for me). It's taken me a bit to get things to work because I just couldn't find all the

Hi, I have recently been looking into virt-v2v, and noticed the mention of an upcoming rewrite in a few places. Is there a roadmap or post someplace that describes the future of this project? I've got a couple of patches against the current code base, and am wondering if they will still be considered for inclusion. Thanks, Mike

Am Samstag, den 22.03.2008, 09:45 -0500 schrieb Andrew Lenharth: > officially support for llvm-gcc4.0 has been dropped. > unofficially I still keep llvm-gcc4.0 compiling because I need it for > some stuff. But this will only last until I can use 4.2. OK, that's a clear roadmap. Maybe the docs should be updated to reflect this status? They still present 4.0 as if it were the default

The only reference that I found so far here: http://llvm.org/devmtg/2011-09-16/EuroLLVM2011-LLVMplusARM.pdf The presenter states that the ARM JIT support is broken. But this is about 10 months old. Is the ARM JIT support still broken? Am I not looking at the right places in the documentation? Help will be appreciated. thanks, Rahul On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Rahul Garg <rahulgarg44 at

On 06.09.2018 22:25, kadafax at gmail.com wrote: > I necro-bump this thread as I have the same problem since I switched to LMTP from LDA (as the wiki recommend). > Any news to make dovecot LMTP postix compliant ? > > > Le 08/11/2016 ? 17:13, Noah Tilton a ?crit?: >> >> I was wondering whether there is a roadmap for adding SMTPUTF8 support to Dovecot? >> >>

Hi. I'm preparing to start a major encoding project, about a TiB or so. Flac is one of the components I plan on using. As I've used it forever anyways and haven't seen a commit since January nor a release since 2007... Is there a general status of flac along with a roadmap available? Only one suggestion: sign the releases with OpenPGP. Thanks for flac! :)

Hi Timo, congrats to the merger with OX. Currently the implementation of RFC 5257, ANNOTATE-EXPERIMENT-1, has only low priority on http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Roadmap I want to explain a scenario that would benefit from annotation support to - maybe - increase the priority in your roadmap: I'm currently working on a project to publish bank customer related documents inside a banking

Hi Chris, Glad to hear from you. I hope everything goes well. This is also very exciting for us. As mentioned in the previous email of Zeson, C-SKY is a RISC architecture for high-performance and energy-efficient processors. Many Processors based on this architecture have been mass produced in different fields. At present, more than 1 billon have been shipped. The community for C-SKY

Hi Rahul, I believe that ARM support is working in the MCJIT engine (as of llvm 3.1). If it wasn't working in the legacy JIT engine 10 months ago then it probably still isn't. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Rahul Garg Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 1:13 PM To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Subject: Re:

Today I finally caught up with my mail. I've now read all the mails from the Dovecot list from this year and all my private mails from last few years (totaling around 500 unread mails). If you think there's still something I should have replied to, please re-send it because I've either missed it or just skipped it for some reason. (Except there are still a couple of mails from this

Hi there, I'm very interested in oVirt as a management interface for a VM setup we're building, however it seems as though there isn't much info on the product roadmap or active development. I'm wondering if anyone could point me to more information on the roadmap or commit activity on the project? Regards, Anthony -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

The subject says it all.

Hi all... I'm looking once again at the Syslinux roadmap. It seems to me that we're going to have a very hard time making Syslinux 4.00 be the full-featured everything-in-C release I had hoped for, or perhaps more specifically, that it is justifiable to sit on the current filesystems-in-C code waiting for the rest. That would probably mean productizing the transitional COM32R module

Hi, I have several Debian servers with puppet 0.23.2. Part of my manifest looks like this: class virt_all_users { @group { "andy": ensure => "present", gid => "1000" } @user { "andy": ensure => "present", uid => "1000",

Did the project ever come to a decision about making a transition to git? I'm trying to do some longer-term planning and it would be helpful to know what the roadmap is. Thanks! -Dave

On 16 February 2015 at 14:55, Sandro Bonazzola <sbonazzo at redhat.com> wrote: > Il 13/01/2015 17:08, Sandro Bonazzola ha scritto: >> Hi, >> I'm Sandro Bonazzola, member of the Virt SIG for oVirt Project. >> I would like to get access and contribute to http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/oVirt >> My wiki account is SandroBonazzola > > Can you give me access