[Gllug] re: qmail

[Bruce Richardson]

On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 08:14:44AM +0000, t.clarke wrote:
> I too use qmail, and have found no problems with it.
> 
> Until the SMTP spec changes, it would seem that the apparent lack of DJB
> support is not a problem.

Extensions to SMTP and Internet e-mail architecture are inevitable,
given the ever-growing load that abuse is placing on it.  This will
require yet more user-contributed patches, taking the qmail set-up that
people actually use ever further away from the original code.

I prefer to use applications which are actively maintained in a rational
fasion, where enhancements are merged into the core code and are then
properly reviewed and audited.  I can still opt not to include those
enhancements and so avoid bloat.

In contrast, enhancements to qmail are forced, by DJB's attitude, always
to remain as patches.  Not only are they not reviewed by the maintainer
of the core code, they are less likely to get the same comprehensive
field-testing as patches for more sanely developed applications, since
real-world qmail set-ups are more widely divergent, with the result that
the impact of any one patch on any other patch (or combination of
patches) is less likely to be monitored.

The irony is that DJB's attitude poses a significantly risk to the
security of his supposedly super-secure application.

-- 
Bruce

Those who cast the votes decide nothing.  Those who count the
votes decide everything. -- Joseph Stalin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20040312/02d72659/attachment.pgp>
-------------- next part --------------
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug