On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 11:57:11PM +0300, Rolandas Juodzbalis wrote: > Andreas Barth wrote: > > I can currently count at least these servers than can support pop3 > >Is there any reason why tpop3d should be better than any of those? And > >if so, which of these servers can we drop IYO? Please don't understand > >me wrong, but we already have an incredible amount of software in > >Debian. If I look at the list of orphaned packages, or at the list of > >long-standing RC-bugs (currently 167 in sarge, much more in sid), than > >it seems sometimes to me that we have too many than too less packages. > > > >Please don't take this personal. It's not meant as an vote about your > >package, but more like a general remark that's also valid for this > >package. > Thanks for your opinion, but I will try to describe my small motives ;) > Yes it is true from point of current debian developers, maintainers and > bug fixers that one more package is one more possible headache in > future. But from my side, as standart system administrator, I was unable > to use any of your listed pop3 server to get my stuff working as I > wanted. Some of them have unreproduceable bugs with MS MUA's, some are > too complex for setuping on small systems. Currently I'm using tpop3d > for more that half year and very happy with it's perfomance and > features. So I wondered why such great pop3 server has no package in my > favorite distro? Instead of filling wishlist I maked package. Yes, > instead being passive user of Debian I wanted to make some work for it. > And it is up to Debian community to choose if I will be passive user > or will start to do something really useful. Cool. I wish you luck in finding a sponsor. Be sure to list your motives and rational for using this software rather than another in the package description. Justin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature