[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2003, at 12:06 PM, Kelley G wrote: > >> Hello: >> >> Bill, I think your qmail toaster is great and am preparing to apply >> the latest patches. >> >> Also, developing a site called toasterz.com for documentation >> and information about migrating to *nix based servers from windows >> and other os's. >> >> Our first to document is the qmail based toaster. So, maybe we could >> pool our >> efforts. Thoughts? Ideas about standardizing approaches, paths and such. >> >> Links and text docs can be submitted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] make sure >> you include any >> licensing and copyright info related to usage. >> >> There's little at this link as yet. >> http://www.toasterz.com > > > Seems like toasters are becoming a dime a dozen these days. : ) > > I'm not sure what there is to standardize. Some people like to tend > toward distribution defaults for paths. I use software defaults (like > the apache default, and having the other http related apps conform to > that), as it just makes sense to me. Beyond that, I tend toward the > LWQ documentation, which is pretty much the standard Qmail reference. > > I think the most useful part of what you propose is the information on > migration, and the portal idea for links to existing toasters. > > Regards, > > Bill Shupp > well, from the point of view of a newbie admin, the less confusion, the better. one toaster uses a /service directory with symlinks for svscan and another toaster uses the file directory /var/qmail/supervise directly. some package admin files are in /etc/mail/ and others /var/spool.
the toaster idea is powerful and compelling, however, the info on the web needs some consistency in order to spread the toaster beyond it's current niche. i suppose i'll put some of my experiences and frustrations up in a post to get started. i recently (over the last 9 months) executed from scratch scalable mail and web services in open source... so these things are fresh in my mind.
it seems prospective clients are interested in saving money, etc and love the toaster analogy. however, i find it difficult to convey the open source approach in lay terms, and describing the superiority of modular software design vs. monolithic all but impossible.
for example.
prospective client: "so, why should i use linux and not windows for this server task?" me "it costs much less intially and is easier to administer... increased security is nice too." me "we can put one in place and see how it works alongside you existing servers" client: "sounds good, where can i learn more?" me "how much do you know about unix?' client: "what's unix?" <depressing details ommitted> me "thanks for your time, could we get together to work out the proposal's specifics?" client "let me get back to you after i speak to my (windows) IT dept" <fud ensues> no contract.
maybe others have had similar experiences and will share them to help to get this started.
