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

Re: INN packages

On Jan 16, Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com> wrote:

 >I think your attitude towards users of the Debian INN package (calling some
 >of them "lusers", and copping such a big attitude towards what you perceive
 >as "toy servers") really stinks.  It strongly tempted me to just ignore your
My attitude does not change the facts: INN 2.2 is not suitable for a
big server and is not needed for a small one. So why forcing users a
*very* difficult upgrade (and do that two times, since upgrading to 2.3
will need manual changes too)?

 >message, Marco.  I would like to think we can have a reasonable technical 
 >discussion without needing to inject so much attitude?
You carefully ignored my technical arguments while replying to this

 >I think you are confusing "stable" with something else.  I believe that
Yes, I think a program should be *useful*, not just stable.

 >stable release, and the majority of discussion in the various forums where
 >INN gets talked about suggest to me that many sites are running 2.X versions
 >quite successfully.  There are certainly some substantial performance 
That's weird, from reading inn-workers and news.software.nntp I had the
opposite impression. And the main INN developer stated many times people
should wait for 2.3.


Reply to: