Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 02:48:41PM +0800, Feizhou wrote: > >>Ooh, I am so worried. > > > You might not be about this particular problem, but it *should* make you > worried about the state of qmail in general -- unmaintained by the one > person who can do anything about it, and legally unmaintainable by anyone > else. what is wrong with qmail? There is also netqmail if you want something maintained. I personally do not see anything wrong with it. > > >>idiot postfix poster. There was hardly anything nervous on the list. > > > Well, depends if you call ad hominem attacks and a quick "discount-first, > think-later" response as nervous. I might. Since when did Leonard Budney come to represent the entire qmail list members? This guy was rabid all the way to the end too. > > > >>Quite a few qmail old hands such as Russel Nelson (maintainer of >>www.qmail.org) wanted DJB to update his installation instructions so >>that inetd is no longer mentioned. > > > This is *exactly* the point -- except it applies to the whole project, not > just the documentation. > Many people do not share your view. They find qmail as it is perfectly acceptable. That includes large ISPs.