[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian presence on newer platforms



On 3/26/19 7:07 PM, Jonas Meurer wrote:

Hi Alex,

Alexander Wirt:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, Jonas Meurer wrote:
Alexander Wirt:
In my experience as a former mailman admin and listadmin mailman is a
no-go.
Getting our feature set even nearly into mailman is impossible, takes years
and will just get us an unmaintainable thing. I don't want to ever run a
bigger mailman setup again.
Can you give an example, what from "our feature set" is missing in
mailman? Also, you probably mean mailman2, right? Have you taken a look
at mailman3 recently?
Sure, just a few coming into mind:

All those gpg related features we use, our spam removal tools, our special
archiving hacks, we way we support blacklist through several lists, our
second line of spamfiltering, crossassassin, the way we can do management on
several lists and probably a lot more I forgot. It may take man years to do a
migration (in fact we talked about that a few days ago in our internal IRC
channel and this is more or less consense about the needed effort).
Thanks for elaborating on that. At least some of them might be
interesting to submit as mailman3 feature requests as they probably
would be of help for other projects that use mailman3 as well.

I fully understand that you as the listmasters don't consider to switch
right now though.

I expect it wouldn't be all that hard to migrate to Sympa.  Also open source, well supported, and designed for much larger operations than mailman (designed for universities).  Converting archives might be an issue, or older archives could just be left as is.

Miles Fidelman (runs a Sympa installation)




--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra

Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown


Reply to: