On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 22:30 +0800, Feizhou wrote:
> Les, quit making false statements about qmail.
Nothing I've said about qmail has been false.
> qmail does not have any
> logical flaws otherwise Wietse would not follow the same design
> principles in postfix after his spat with DJB.
That's a funny interpretation - if qmail had been done correctly there
would have been no need for postfix.
> qmail's problem is that
> the author has not done any updates to it since 1998 to handle the
> changed needs required of a MTA software since then.
In the open source world that is not a problem. If something needs
to be fixed, someone will fix it because they are allowed to. That
has happened with sendmail. What the original author does or doesn't
do is mostly irrelevant.
> qmail is a fine piece of software and it also introduced the maildir
> format which is now widely supported and used by anyone who cares about
> the integrity of their mailboxes.
I have no problem with maildir - or the format cyrus uses for that
matter,
but that's not relevant to a discussion of mail transports. Sendmail
doesn't perform local delivery. If you want maildir, tell procmail to
use that and you get maildir. If you want cyrus, use the delivery agent
it provides.
> I cannot understand what you have
> against qmail to go around bad mouthing it. Don't tell me a stuffed
> queue and perhaps a listing in some over zealous RBL was all it took.
The first thing that turned me off about qmail was its insistence on
sending separate copies of messages to multiple recipients at the same
remote host. The machines I manage have always had a usage pattern of
most email being to distribution groups along the lines of departmental
memos with many recipients grouped at remote offices, and at the time
delivery happened over slow and expensive private lines where this kind
of stupid behavior just didn't work. I've never expected software to be
perfect but I do expect it to improve over time. With anything written
by DJB, this doesn't happen and the best thing to do is run away and
don't look back. When qmail also demonstrated its inability to process
inbound mail it was just additional proof that my first impression had
been right.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com