[NTLUG:Discuss] MTA's

[Brian]

On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 05:30:28PM -0500, Aaron Goldblatt wrote:
> > robust and secure; and tcpwrapper/daemontools are awesome.  Some negatives:  Many of
> > the people on the qmail mailing lists are arrogant assholes; there are some RFC
> 
> A note on this: If you're careful to fully document everything you've done, provide 
> config files and log snippets, undoctored, and clearly outline what it is you're 
> wanting to accomplish, what you've tried before, what happened when you tried it, 
> and what documentation you've looked at and didn't find what you needed or didn't 
> understand, they can be quite helpful.  The mailing list archives are also available 
> and well worth a look first.  But they have no mercy on people who say "qmail 
> doesn't work" and that's it.

They don't have an awful lot of mercy on well-documented RFC deficiencies either:

http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/2000/11/msg00444.html

If you're patient and actually follow the thread to its conclusion, you'll see that
the arrogant attitude that "qmail can do no wrong" is replaced by "well, maybe
there *is* a problem." (Of course there's a problem:  Anybody who says an MTA
doesn't have to be RFC822-compliant doesn't really know what they're talking about,
especially when the non-compliance aspect breaks when handling compliant mail.)

I've talked to several people who have simply left qmail behind due to the
prevailing attitude on the qmail lists.  I've chosen to  simply patch the
bugs/incompatibilities I find and keep them to myself.

  --Brian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://ntlug.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20020828/28870253/attachment.bin