On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 09:46:51PM +0200, Paul J Stevens wrote: > Christian G. Warden wrote: > >On Sat, Mar 26, 2005 at 02:26:39PM +0100, Paul J Stevens wrote: > > > >>Christian G. Warden wrote: > >> > >>>I'm finally getting around to upgrading an old pre-2.0 installation of > >>>DBMail. According to the wiki[1], the DBMail 2.0 Debian packages > >>>contain the table prefix patch, but I just downloaded the source package > >>>and I don't see it in there. Am I missing something? > >> > >>The prefix patch was merged with the 2.0 codebase sometime ago already. > > > > > > > >On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 03:30:03PM +0200, Paul J Stevens wrote: > > > >>Robert, > >> > >>Mmm, the 2.1 codebase allows setting the table prefix at runtime. But > >>that patch didn't make it into the 2.0 codebase. > > > > > >The latter message is correct, right? No configurable table prefixes in > >2.0, neither cvs/svn nor the Debian packages? > > I specifically checked today. I was wrong the first time around. But I also > don't see any reference to debian packages containing the prefix patch, not > on the wiki and not on the dbmail.org site... Maybe I'm not looking at the > right places. > > There is currently no runtime setting of the prefix for dbmail tables in > 2.0. > > The table prefix was introduced during the 2.0rc series. It was a schema > change that was disruptive for the userbase. As such it was a mistake that > was corrected by making the table prefix a runtime setting, but that change > did not go into the branch for 2.0 which was by that time in > release-critical bugfix deepfreeze whathaveyou. > > Ancient politics. Lessons hopefully learned.
Thanks for the clarification. If the patch isn't too instrusive, I'll try to backport it to 2.0. Here's the page that should be updated: http://www.dbmail.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=developmentplansandideas#3 Christian
