On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Brian Kolaci wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, John Johnson wrote:
> >
> > > I am not a programmer but from what I can see this
> > > looks like a clean and very efective way to do the
> > > qmailadmin-limits. If you try to bloat things down
> > > for something that MIGHT be added or changed then
> > > we really will not have things really planned, they
> > > will be half planned and still open waiting for the
> > > stuff people might want to add to the tables. I say
> > > we go with this, lock it down and make it happen and
> > > deal with tomarrow when tomarrow happens as far as the
> > > tables.
> > >
> > > -John
> > >
> >
> > Yeah. This sounds good. I just find out that I need qmailadmin-limits
> > myself too, and it would be nice to store this data in mysql.
> >
> > Brian, do you already have some patches for this?
> >
> > I'm willing to test and maybe spent some time coding this if needed..
> >
> >
> > - Pasi Kärkkäinen
>
>
> I've had the basic table layouts done since January
> and have been running in production with a patched
> vdelivermail and qmailadmin since then. Mine supports
> the limits as given, and the quotas (not message counts)
> in vdelivermail. It should take more or less an hour to
> get this written - actually just change what I have
> to include the additional fields, however you're only
> the second person to reply to this. I was hoping to get
> a consensus from people as to what else is needed or
> required, or find out if its overkill and to strip some.
>
OK. Sounds good.
Maybe you should just put those patches available.. people could
test them and start giving feedback.. At least I would
do so :)
> Thanks,
>
> Brian
>
- Pasi Kärkkäinen
^
. .
Linux
/ - \
Choice.of.the
.Next.Generation.
