Re: Status of qmail?
Manfred Bartz <MBartz@werple.net.au> writes:
> When I was looking for a MTA, I had to start from scratch anyway -- no
> prior investment of any kind. After some initial investigation qmail
> looked IMHO by far the best. Even though I personally don't like
> DJB's coding style, I get a very strong impression that qmail has been
> engineered, possibly with the aid of formal, mathematically correct
> methods.
>
> By contrast, looking at the sendmail spaghetti and other sendmail-ish
> MTAs and their configuration language sent a shiver down my spine ;-)
FWIW, I started with sendmail, then switched to qmail because it
seemed substantially better, and finally switched to exim after
getting tired of the lack of a Debian package, and the "my way or the
highway" rhetoric [1], and after seeing how helpful/responsive the
exim community is. I've never regretted it. But I suppose this
probably belongs on alt.advocay.mda :>
[1] If all the upstream maintainers had DJB's attitute, it might be
very difficult for Debian to even exist. It would certainly be
difficult to maintain its current consistency. I don't want to
support that when there are good alternatives.
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: