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

Re: Bug#457318: ITP: qmail -- a secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer agent

This one time, at band camp, Turbo Fredriksson said:
> So to be or not to be is irrelevant - the question is: are we
> ALLOWED to distribute it or not?

No, actually the question is whether it's worth Debian's time to maintain
it, distribute it, and support it.  qmail is one of the few pieces
of software I've ever seen that is so poorly written that it's author
recommends running it under a supervisor because it can't stay running
on it's own.  It also doesn't support most useful features any reasonable
MTA can be expected to support without fairly extensive patching.

So, right, the argument we're left with is, it's quick and it doesn't
have many apparent security flaws.  The fact that it's a poor netizen
and is also unstable, featureless, and trivially replaced with things
that do respect the FHS are IMHO more important.  If someone actually
cares, I suppose I'll say go ahead, but what a waste of time and energy.
The world has moved on and qmail has been made irrelevant because of
it's original licensing decisions.  I think that at this point, qmail
serves better as an object lesson in license idiocy than as a serious
candidate for the archive.
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                        sgran@debian.org |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                     http://www.debian.org |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: