* Johan Beisser <j...@caustic.org> [2009-05-12 01:30]: > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Dan <d...@ourbrains.org> wrote: > > So it seems like the goal is for it to be as good or better than qmail > > if it's going to be smaller, easier to maintain, secure, etc. Then > > where's the problem? > > Saying qmail has good design is a firm hand you've not actually really > worked with it or maintained a large installation of it before.
qmail was very important when it came out. the basic design is very good, it is one of the first things that did some kind of privilege seperation. but qmail was never an MTA, it really is a collection of building blocks for an MTA. many things in qmail are way too weird and different just to be different and idiotic because the author thinks he is the only one who understands the world and unix is wrong anyway and whatnot. without qmail showing up in 98 there is a good chance we still had to deal with monolithic monster MTAs running everything in one giant process as root (or not dropping privs for real) -- Henning Brauer, h...@bsws.de, henn...@openbsd.org BS Web Services, http://bsws.de Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam
