I was introduced to XMail by a colleague of mine.
At first it seemed cryptic and it still is for some stuff I am interested in.
I've been using it since 2003 and never looked back.
On Sun, 24/5/15, U.Mutlu via xmail <email@example.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [xmail] new maintainer for the 1.27 branch
To: "Bart Mortelmans" <b...@bim.be>, "XMail Users Mailing List"
Date: Sunday, 24 May, 2015, 19:07
Hi Bart & All,
Bart Mortelmans via xmail wrote on 05/16/2015 10:27 PM:
> I have been using XMail for what must have been almost
15 years. I still
> prefer XMail for anything that does not need IMAP.
I have no experience yet with Dovecot, but what does it mean
they say "If you already have XMail Setup and just want to
add in IMAP
support See : dovecot-setup.html" on this webpage:
I think what it's trying to say is : "if you have already XMail setup for
pop3/smtp, all you need is dovecot for lmtp/imap.
I have working installations with XMail / dovecot / Horde and it works
like a dream. No problems there. That has been for about seven years;
Since 2008 I think.
> I made some small changes to the code. If anybody would
be willing to pick
> up XMail and start development again, I hope that these
changes can also
> get into the new version. If you need more details, let
Thx, since Davide is not reachable for a very long time now
WOW ! 3 Years ? I know he has a life (no pun intended) apart from
his XMail project. I also know he has developed other stuff
(see here : http://xmailserver.org/davide.html) but I never expected for
him to just abandon XMail. It's a good project. Why would he do this ?
I hereby accounce my general interest in bugfixing and
features (patches and wishes of users) into the current 1.27
if time permits. I'll also setup an svn repository.
There are many nice things one could add to XMail. However I am
not a developer and I can only propose stuff.
One feature I longed for is the ability to view e-mail traffic in real-time
and also XMail be able to log incoming and outgoing messages.
The only problem is: at this time I can't support any other
OS beyond Linux.
will brand the new version something like "v1.27.n.linux"
where "n" is a counter.
> - Change the default error message for a failed
pre-date or post-data
> filter to code 451 (by default this would otherwise be
554 which means
> there won’t be an other attempt). For me 451 makes
much more sense.
Can you explain how this is meant?
Is it the return code of the filter program like discussed
> - Added basic support for LMTP. That way I can have
XMail deliver mails to
> dovecot directly. For this, I just had to add the LHLO
message next to the
> HELO and EHLO. This works for me, as with my
configuration there shouldn’t
> be any event in which XMail tries to deliver one e-mail
> recipients via LTMP. I’m not sure if there might be
> for which more work would be needed for LMTP to work.
This sounds not trivial :-) I must admit I have no
experience yet with LMTP,
but I saw wikipedia has a page about it:
That would be nice. To send e-mails directly (internally ?) to
dovecot . . . . Am I getting this right ?
> - Made XMail log a line to SMAIL log in case of
delivery failure (posted
> details on this in an e-mail to this mailing list very
Yeah, I would need that feature too.
I recently added this feature into xmail:
spamassassin (spamd via spamc) reports, with default
to every mail received by xmail the following bad score of
"1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal
network by a host with no rDNS"
After much research and experimenting I figured out what the
it is the "Received:" line xmail prepends to the mail
"ReceivedHdrType" in server.tab. There are choices from 0 to
I added one more (5), and now spamassassin no more gives the
Also nice to have sa work in some way with XMail.
Never managed to get my head round it (spamassassin,
> If anybody is taking feature requests: I would be
interested in a way of
> XMail talking to a “filter” via a socket. Now, for
every e-mail to be
> filtered, a process has to be started. It would be much
more efficient if
> XMail could talk a filter-server via a socket. That
filter server could be
> anything, but maybe we could even get it to talk
directly to spamd and
Yes, that's a good idea. I'll study the xmail sources.
Finally. Some mail traffic on this list after a looong time . . . .