Re: Postfix as default MTA?
On Sat, Jul 03, 1999 at 08:13:40PM +0000, Georg Bauer wrote:
> In article <19990630001540.A9123@rising.com.au>, Hamish Moffatt
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >I would compromise performance before simplicity for a default MTA.
> Yes. And add documentation as my major point on choosing a default MTA -
> what does it help the newbie if he has a technological superior MTA, if he
> can't use it?
i think you should try postfix before assuming that it is difficult to
use: postfix is easy to use, easy to configure, and easy to learn.
my comments on other mailers are at least based on experience rather
than assumptions - i've used all of them for varying periods of time:
sendmail and smail for many years, qmail for nearly two years, exim i
used to use on systems where mail wasn't terribly important, i gave
up on zmailer after a few days (hard to configure and very badly
documented), and postfix for 7 months now.
based on my experiences, i would happily recommend postfix to anyone.
it has all of the advantages of each of the other mailers, without
the disadvantages. i.e. it is the ideal (or as close to ideal as is
possible) generic mailer - works well in all situations.
> Forget everything about "intuitive configuration files" - that doesn't
> work. A default MTA that doesn't have enough documentation for newbies
> to use it and for professionals to get work done (or to decide against
> it and choose another, because some situation can not be solved with
> this one) creates more problems than it solves.
postfix's default configuration works well for most situations, and the
documentation is good (not perfect, but no documentation ever is).