Rick Widmer wrote: > > > DAve wrote: >> Rick Widmer wrote: >>> On the other hand, what do you want to do with it now that it is public >>> domain? 100 forks -- all different -- will not help the qmail world. >> >> I think that will be the natural progression, and it will probably be a >> good thing in the long run. Those who actually know qmail and understand >> it's operation will provide the best packaged solutions, and those who >> do not know qmail will gravitate to those products. In the end, the >> cream will rise to the top. > > You are probably right that is what will happen. I don't have to like > it though. :) I think there should be one qmail, and the next version > should be qmail-1.05 -- exactly the same thing as you get from > netqmail-1.05. Then add the ability to control common patches with a > ./configure script. > >> The question in my mind is who will own the name qmail, and what >> product, if any, will bear that name. > > I don't know if it'll be approved, but I got the qmail project name on > SourceForge, minutes after I heard it was put in public domain. > > > > >
We'd run a Inter7 supported version of qmail-1.5, of course the nicest thing is we can change nothing and go on happy as clams with our installs of the old patchy, outdated, unsupported qmail that so many seem to hate soooo much. ;^) DAve -- I've been asking Google for a Veteran's Day logo since 2000, maybe 1999. I was told they finally did a Veteran's Day logo, but none of the links I was given return anything but a normal Google logo. Sad, very sad. Maybe the Chinese Government didn't like it? !DSPAM:475453e032007800612025!
