Re: What is the best mailling list manager for qmail and Domain Tech. Control ?
On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:35:00PM +0100, Joris wrote:
> >Majordomo is good, but I think you'd like "mailman" better.
> >
> >Web interface for both users and administrators, very configurable, etc.
>
> I'd recommend mailman too, but I have to warn for it's archive function.
all list managers suck, but in different ways.
> Afaik mailman is only capable of archiving messages in Mbox format.
if only that was true. it's archiving program (pipermail) creates something
that is *almost* but not quite mbox. to load the archive into an mbox mail
reader (e.g. mutt or elm) you have to open the file in a text editor and change
every From_ line so that it conforms to mbox format.
> Yes, that same dreadfull mbox format that has kept all mail related
> applications slow for years.
you don't know what you're talking about.
there is only one circumstance where mbox is slower than maildir, and
manipulating archives is not it. reading mail with a crappy pop daemon (like
qpopper) that copies the entire mbox to /tmp is where mbox is slower, and
that's mostly because qpopper sucks rather than mbox itself sucking. better
quality pop daemons (e.g. cucipop or anything newer) are not noticably slower
on reasonably-sized mboxes.
where maildir shines is when you have many thousands of messages and you need
direct access to just one of them. maildir can be much faster at that IFF
you're not on a file system that sucks (like ext2 or ext3) - you really need a
fs that doesn't suck when you have thousands of files in one directory: xfs or
reiserfs, for example.
> I've had a mailing list's archive grow over a couple 100MB's, and mailman
> started bogging down the system. (took quite a while to realise what was
> going on)
i have numerous majordomo based list archives, as well as my own personal mail
archives, all in mbox format(*). there are no speed problems with any of them.
pipermail is broken.
(*) mbox is, IMO, a superior format for archiving. one file per archive is better
than squillions of little files.
craig
Reply to: