On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 04:10, Tomas Fasth wrote: > Mark Constable wrote: > > Such a pity. I provide a small Linux distro and sell > > pre-configured boxes and have spent 1/2 a year ramping > > up to the next u-beaut no-shell-accounts-on-this-baby > > version and cannot possibly justify including courier-mta > > when it will cause so much grief for those who deploy > > my systems. > > Dear Mark, > I can't help but to flame. Voluntary people should have no mercy for > whining selfish bigots like you. To provide a distro for paying > customers and not even bother to apply the tinyest of patches to > increase the value for your customers... I say, you're a lazy parasite > who feed it self on other's hard work. You can quit now and go away. You > have already wasted too much of other's bandwidth. Or you can prove me > wrong.
I sell the hardware, NOT the distro. My concern is for the courier mail package as a whole. I think it's the best mail system available and Sams support on this list is excellent. My argument is simply that Sam make this RFC2045 check OPTIONAL otherwise any ISP with enough clients will NOT be able to run a stock standard courier install. That means all those RPM and DEB based servers out there will require an extra iteration of attention from tech staff that may prevent the adoption of the courier system in the first place... that bothers me because I want to see this system deployed as widely as possible so it gets major support from all involved and remains the best mail system on the planet. I am not the first and I certainly will not be the last person to take issue with this problem. Please note this is not an imflamatory response. --markc _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
