On 10/24/11 5:49 AM, Gautam wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Sean C. Farley <s...@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> >> On 10/16/2011 15:49, Ted Hatfield wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> re-alpine >>>> >>>> >>>> Of course, this could (should?) wait until 9 is out the door. >> >> >> Alpine is also documented in the handbook > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/mail-agents.html ; so that also should > be updated. >
Does the way in which re-alpine is used differ? If so, the Handbook can be updated if/when alpine is replaced with re-alpine, that's not a problem. I suspect, based on this thread, it won't be necessary other than noting the port is mail/re-alpine instead of mail/alpine. The Documentation people would be happy to update the alpine section in the Handbook in either case. Though, not all doc people are subscribed to ports@ - can someone ping us if/when re-alpine is in the tree as a replacement? -- Glen Barber | g...@freebsd.org FreeBSD Documentation Project _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
