Rainer Duffner wrote: > Am 17.03.2009 um 21:19 schrieb Per Qvindesland: > > >> No as I said it does not have all the synchronizing stuff but rock >> solid >> email server, sadly Zimbra in my humble opinion not really free, but >> of >> course there is http://www.opengroupware.org/ http://www.citadel.org/ >> http://www.open-xchange.com/EN/developer/index.html and http://kolab.org >> to >> mention a few all with their own pro's and con's >> > > > All the "free" solutions depend on you spending an extra-ordinary > amount of time configuring them. > > The amount of QA needed to pull something like Zimbra off is > staggering (sometimes it's still not enough QA....) > > My own mail is qmail-only - I gave-up trying to get all the > calendaring-packages running long ago. > But at work, we have Zimbra and is is really cool IMO. > It has a slick web-interface, it sync's with Outlook, Mac - and then > there is this great/horrible fat client called Zimbra Desktop... > ;-) > > > I have to admit, though, that the list-price for a small amount of > mailboxes looks not so cheap (esp. if you want Zimbra Mobile). > (How many mailboxes does the original author want to replace, actually?) > I was running the mailserver for a local organization and that was 30+ users on top of my 10+. They have gone to another site, so I am back to 10+. For now... > But still, I'm kind of fascinated by it - mostly, because it's very > openly developed and by browsing through their bugzilla and P4 > repository-webinterface, you get a good idea of what current issues > there are, what would get fixed by going to a newer version (and which > new bugs to expect). > I wish every vendor did that. > > We run it on CentOS, BTW (test/dev environment via Virtuozzo, > production on physical hardware). > > > > > Rainer > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > >