Re: Qmail (was Mailman problems)
Derrick 'dman' Hudson declaimed:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:03:58AM -0900, Andy wrote:
snip...
> Personally I am opposed to qmail, mainly for reasons outlined here :
> http://www-dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de/~ma/qmail-bugs.html
> http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html
> however if you want to use it that is your choice^Wproblem <0.5 wink>.
> The second link gives the reason there is no debian package for qmail
> (only a source package).
>
> -D
Heh. Entertaining reading. I'm not competent to comment on the author's
tests or comments. They appear rational, although well-seasoned with
resentment. It's always sad to hear about developers that dodge sincere
critiques. It's one thing to say "Yes, those bugs sure are ugly but we
just don't feel the effort of fixing them is worth it right now." and
another to say "What bugs? I don't see any bugs" while scratching
uncontrollably.
Having worked QA for a commercial software developer, I have a lot of
sympathy for the former stance: You can't fix everything you'd like to
and you're not in a position to be truly objective. And it's irritating
to have people confront you with problems that you've decided (perhaps
painfully) not to fix. On the other hand, the latter stance is
untenable.
For my home system I have to admit that I stick to Exim because a) it's
been problem free, and b) path of least resistance. And oh yes, let me
mention that quite a few of my scripts, settings, and other fixes have
been provided by or suggested by Dman since I migrated to Debian and
joined this list.
Thanks! Paul
--
Paul Mackinney
paul@mackinney.net
Reply to: