From: Byron C. Darrah (bdarr@sse.FU.HAC.COM)
Date: Thu Feb 04 1999 - 19:55:37 CST
> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 19:36:52 -0600 (CST)
> From: Jenni Baier <jenni@renewed.net>
>
> On Thu, 4 Feb 1999, Byron C. Darrah wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > 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.
Well, we don't really have a choice. Who controls the "official" release
of hypermail? I think that at this point, that is Kent. Unless he
expressly passes that privilege on to someone else, we should not presume
to have it.
> There are, without a doubt, many "strains" out
> there that have been modified and/or improved by different people already.
All too true. But anyone that releases such a modified version to the net
without clearly marking it as such is simply acting irresponsibly. That
does not mean that we have to do the same.
--Byron Darrah