On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 11:21:27PM -0400, Rob Funk wrote:
I think that keeping the name unchanged without ESR's approval would be
tantamount to a hostile takeover. I wouldn't be comfortable keeping the
fetchmail name unchanged for a fork unless either Eric said go ahead or we
got some confirmation that for whatever reason he's not coming back to it.
Otherwise I prefer adding some tag to identify it as a new branch of
development, with the possibility open of changing back in the future if
that were to become appropriate.
One other thought I had... if Eric does want to rewrite fetchmail entirely,
it would seem objectively appropriate for that rewrite effort to have a
new name, and a new effort based on the old codebase would seem to deserve
the old name. But again, I don't want to act on assumptions about Eric's
For now, I propose the name of "Community Fetchmail", with the installed
filenames remaining the same. (This time the analogy is to GNU
Ghostscript vs Aladdin/AFPL Ghostscript, without the license mess.)
Agreed; everything here sounds good.
I suppose your not interested in coordinating releases, though, since
you no longer use fetchmail? Given that you are a backup maintainer,
though, would you be interested in giving the new project an initial
To me that would include choosing an individual or small group to have
commit access to some central repository. That individual or group can
then choose whichever hosting solution is best for them.