jms1 at jms1
Nov 8, 2007, 11:40 AM
Post #10 of 15
(1622 views)
Permalink
|
On 2007-11-07, at 1929, David T. Ashley wrote:
> On 11/7/07, Roy Coates <roy [at] flightlab> wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Mário Gamito wrote:
>>
>>> I'm building this site - http://www.qmailrules.com/ - about email
>>> servers using qmail.
>>>
>>> I would appreciate some feedback about it from you.
>>
>> All info is good as far as I'm concerned! I run a few mailservers
>> because I have to, i'm no expert and when things go wrong I
>> appreciate all
>> the help I can get - so thank you!
>
> Well, we have www.qmail.com, www.lifewithqmail.org (I think),
> www.qmailrocks.???,
> and now www.qmailrules.com. Soon to follow will be qmailexists.com,
> i-use-qmail.com, qmail-saved-my-marriage.com, and qmailsucks.com.
funny, i had the exact same thought when i saw the first message...
"what's next, qmail-works-well-but-its-bloody-complicated.com"?
> Gosh, if the qmail community knew how to work together (which they
> most
> certainly do not)
i wouldn't say that. i didn't go so far as to register a "qmail-is-
awesome" domain name, but i do have a qmail-related web site, http://qmail.jms1.net/
... the pages on my site come from two primary sources- one is the
answers to the questions i get tired of hearing over and over and over
again, and the other is my combined patch.
remember that different people have different needs. some people are
good using "netqmail" by itself, some people need more features and
don't want to spend several hours finding and manually combining them,
so they go with one of the combined mega-patches out there (bill
shupp's, erwin hoffman's, mine, etc.) i don't know if their patches
are using anything i wrote, but i know for a fact that i'm using parts
of dr. hoffman's code in my own combined patch- and i'm pretty sure
there are some patches which all three of us are using.
if i were to find a bug in one of their patches, i would let them know
about it, probably with a fix... and i'm pretty sure they would do the
same for me.
so maybe we're not all holding hands and pushing the exact same set of
patches for every server on the planet, but your statement makes it
sound like we're all at each others' throats- which is certainly not
the case.
honestly, the primary goal of my web site isn't to "work with others",
it's to document my own stuff and to provide answers for the questions
i get tired of seeing over and over. however if i'm able to help other
patch writers, whether it's fixing something i see wrong, suggesting
new content for their web sites, providing backup web, DNS, or MX
hosting for their domains, or giving them mailboxes on my server so
they can test their own stuff (all of which i have done for people in
the past) i'm more than happy to help.
> they would put together a plan to have any interested
> party control a portion of the web content at www.qmail.org, and let
> the
> mirroring apply to that as well.
that's entirely up to russ. qmail.org is HIS web site. and while i
think that what you're suggesting might be cool, i don't see it
happening. if russ is like most of us, he has better things to do with
his time than to totally re-work his web site to allow "x" number of
other people access to maintain specific areas of the site.
i think the best we can realistically ask is that he add links from
the qmail.org page to that new site, and hoping he gets around to it
before too long.
for example, i've been waiting several months for my "validrcptto.cdb"
patch to be added, even if it's just a footnote after the original
"validrcptto" patch upon which mine was based. i figure russ will get
around to it when he has time, especially if i gently remind him about
it from time to time (like i'm doing right now, hint hint.)
> Kind of like some companies do with
> www.companyname.com/~employeeid. It doesn't seem efficient for
> everyone to
> set up their own tips-and-tricks website independently.
efficient for whom?
i understand that it might be more work for n00bs who just google
"qmail" to have to figure out which web sites are and are not worth
paying attention to- look at how many people blindly follow the
qmailrocks.org directions every day, and end up with sorta-working
servers and no idea how to administer them.
i think a better idea might be a list which contains links to other
sites which are known to contain good information. of course, whoever
hosts such a list would have control over who does and doesn't get
listed, so that person should be somebody whom the qmail community
knows and trusts.
oh wait- don't we already have that, at http://qmail.org/ ?
----------------------------------------------------------------
| John M. Simpson --- KG4ZOW --- Programmer At Large |
| http://www.jms1.net/ <jms1 [at] jms1> |
----------------------------------------------------------------
| http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173 |
----------------------------------------------------------------
|
