Bug#158533: project: qmail is installed on murphy
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 02:28:11PM +0000, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 06:44:11AM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 04:31:27AM +0000, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> > > > > The subject says it all. qmail is installed on murphy.debian.org.
> > > >
> > > > The first thing that pops into my mind as to how to answer this bug report
> > > > is... "no shit." :)
> > > >
> > > > We know. We have known for years. Filing a serious bug on the project
> > > > pseudo-package doesn't help us much.
> > >
> > > Great! I'm glad you know about it. In fact, I'm elated. Now that you
> > > know, please do something about it. I know you have many machines running
> > > exim, and I've heard from others that you also run postfix on some
> > > machines. I really don't care what mail-transport-agent Debian uses on
> > > murphy, as long as its free. In fact, "apt-cache showpkg
> > > mail-transport-agent" lists 13 available packages in sid main or non-US.
> >
> > Yeah, but none have been tested and proven to work on lists.debian.org.
> > That's the catch. See the e-mail related graphs at
> > http://murphy.debian.org/mrtg/ for a quick indication why this is so.
>
> None of them will be tested and proven to work if you don't try them.
We have. Our listmasters are quite thorough. We have an exceedingly
customized list software installation, with spam filtering and
impressively resilient bounce handling; moving away from it would
cripple the machine.
I'll leave more details for our listmasters to share, if they want to.
I have confidence in their judgement, and the problem IS being looked
at as the responsible individuals can find time.
> Alternatively, you could pester upstream rather heavily and see if he'd
> make qmail free. I've seen the copyright file for qmail-src, and your
> chances of doing so look good.
You've obviously never dealt with the man.
> In addition, no matter how good, reliable, efficient, or otherwise
> beneficial qmail is, it's still not right for Debian to use it while it
> is in non-free.
It is also not right for us to disrupt our list services. Every time
this argument has come up, there has been a consensus that we need to
switch - but a refusal to do so without a viable list solution. Look
at the graphs; the mail volume is impressive, and we still have just a
few minutes turnaround time on all our lists. We don't want to let
that go; the project as a whole would suffer.
> > BTW, the correct pseudo-package is called "lists.debian.org".
>
> lists.debian.org runs on master, not murphy, although I will admit that
> list mail does run through it. Although I filed this on project partly
> because project is "Problems related to Project administration",
> according to reportbug.
What are you talking about? lists.debian.org _IS_ murphy. I suggest
you investigate the facts before making a suggestion like this.
drow@nevyn:~% mx lists.debian.org
lists.debian.org MX 0 murphy.debian.org
The others are only queuing backups, in case murphy is unreachable.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Reply to: