On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 16:10 -0800, Ask Bjørn Hansen wrote: > On Dec 1, 2007, at 6:51 AM, Guy Hulbert wrote: > > > What I'm asking, is *if* the license had already been changed, *would* > > you have implemented qpsmtpd via XS rather than rewriting qmail-smtpd > > entirely. > > > How much thought did you give to this? :-)
Not all that much. > > It doesn't make any sense. That's a partial answer. > > For starters, qmail-smtpd isn't actively developed - there's no code > base or community improving on that code. It might not have been in > 2001, but as Charlie said, it's obsolete now. Have you looked at qmail.org recently ? > > Second - the functionality is so barebones there's nothing to reuse > without significantly hacking up that code. The initial functional Thanks. That's what I wanted to know. > > port was just a couple hundred lines of Perl - including DNSBL and > RHSBL support. > > Third - nothing qmail-smtpd does is significantly faster in C than in > Perl (the typical reason other than code reuse to do XS). The > performance and scalability paths to make an smtpd server scale better > are in an event model (like we have with the select server). Code reuse is the issue I was interested in. > > > > - ask -- --gh
