Andy Walden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Sorry, I'm still fumbling around trying to get a grip on this. I have to
>feel insanely confortable before I move my userbase over to this new
>server using qmail.
So you're a fascist neophobe. :-)
>I can live with that. The main reasons I'm being pulled in the qmail
>direction are Maildir and the performance hype.
Hype? Who's hyping it? It really is much faster than sendmail.
>> What is it about extension addresses that bothers you?
>
>Its probably not fully understanding what they do yet.
I understand, but one shouldn't go around hacking out functionality
just because they don't understand it. Do you remove commands from
/bin that you don't fully understand?
>I also am
>responsible for teaching a tech crew how to get around this once I move it
>over and when a call comes in where mail is disappearing, they can't do a
>sendmail -v and some of the traditional processes so I would like to keep
>some very basic rules like all aliases are in /etc/aliases, users can't
>make up variations of their username and have them work as email
>addresses, etc....
What about those pesky .qmail (or .forward) files? Your tech crew
might not be able to follow them. Are you going to outlaw them, too?
>Maybe its facist, makes my life easier in the long haul
>though is all.
That's not a good test for system administration decisions. By
reducto ad absurdum you'd end up with no system to administer. Sure,
that'd be "easier", but you'd be out of a job.
The goal of a system administrator is to provide a system that meets
the user's needs. A good system adminstrator doesn't wait for users
to request a capability: if he sees it would be useful and knows how
it can be implemented, he makes it available and tells his users about
it.
So, sure, you can disable extension addresses or other features of
your system that are "hard" or that you don't understand, but in the
long run you'd be better off if you worked to add functionality
instead of removing it.
-Dave
