Re: Devin's effort

--On Sunday, April 19, 2015 08:43:58 AM -0400 Tanstaafl
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Or maybe I'm mis-reading those emails - some even coming from Devin, who
> appears to be the primary dev for Mulberry (is that right?)...

No.  Cyrus Daboo is the primary dev and AFAIK may have written
most if not all of it.

I am merely a long-term user that is hoping to do a variant based
on Mulberry, but for which I make no promise that it will get past
the vapourware stage. I am a software architect and developer, but
not for Mulberry.

All I suggested is that if people find it necessary to moving away
from Mulberry that they keep subscribed to this low-volume list in
case there are any promising developments in the future.

My previous comments on Mulberry were that:
  1. My main platform on which I use Mulberry is RedHat/CentOS
  2. RHEL 6 is the last version that is supported on 32 bit architectures.
  3. Mulberry does not currently compile under 64 bit mode.
  4. While one could run a 32-bit Mulberry under a 64 bit system that
     has 32 bit support, it still needs to be compiled in 32 bit mode.
     (And currently compiling a 32 bit Mulberry under a 64 bit RHEL6
     is not without its problems).
  5. RHEL 6 end-of-life, depending on other circumstances, is effectively
     sometime between 2017 and 2020 per
     <https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata>.
  6. Therefore, from a *personal* perspective, I need to find a good
     mail solution and have it in place sometime no later than 
     the EOL mentioned in (5).  I would prefer that solution to
     be Mulberry or something very much like it.

Devin