Gregor, I tend to agree with you. In a situation like this, I immediately put myself in the shoes of the originator, or try to. I fully agree with your thoughts about configurability. That definitely is the way to go. I'm such a hacker, that I didn't even think about that(bad on me.) Thanks for reminding me. When my stuff is done, it will come with an "option".
I am probably wrong, but it seems to me that the origin of Courier was that of a single individual who built himself a program that he needed. Then was kind enough to open it up to the rest of the world. I'm wondering if there is a difference between that kind of Open Source project and the ones that are started from scratch to be open source, with a full team, and the goal of providing an alternative software. To me, there is a big difference. I would also agree that any open source project should at least consider the general public and attempt to steer itself towards the greatest use by the greatest number of people, but not at the expense of the free time of the originator or main developer. I do have issues, also, with "Bob" demanding "Dimitri" to change his code to make "Bob's" life easier when "Bob" has just as much power and ability to change the code himself. To me that seems, well, somewhat selfish and not quite in the spirit. I hope I'm wrong and have mis-read the situation. If so, my humblest apologies to Giovanni and the group (for wasting bandwidth). If I'm not wrong, then I hope my point is made in a non-insulting manner. :) bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregor Lawatscheck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 7:53 PM Subject: Re: [courier-users] Re: RFC compliance: goodbye to courier MTA > At 09:02 12/03/2003, you wrote: > >Giovanni, > > > >May I make a recommendation? > > > >The great thing about open source software is that it lets you make changes > >that you need to. In my case there are a few of things I'm looking for > >which courier doesn't do. However, rather than ask Sam, or anybody else to > >take up their valuable time working on code for me, I am making the changes > >myself. Then, when I have test them and know they work, I'll submit a > >patch. Then, if the patch is deemed to fit with the overall goal and scope > >of the software, it may get integrated. If it doesn't, I won't be sore, > >because that's not what its all about. > > Bill, > you're right, the great thing about Open Source is if you don't like > something you can change it for yourself. I am convinced however that it > ought to be in the interest of any good open source product to give the > best experience out of the box. Just because it is changeable shouldn't > have to mean that everyone who needs it in a production environment like an > ISP should have to hack it to get full compatibility with all the flawed > clients around. > > I can see why it's desirable to refuse email without <> or other common > syntax errors, as it's bad practice and might break MUAs (?) but I'm afraid > we can't really teach the originators of this evil by penalizing the users. > The question is then not to raise a complaint to the Courier user group or > Sam but rather to decide that it might be a good idea to have further > configuration options to allow for even more compatibility. If a good > number of users hack their MTA to allow mails with some sort of minor > syntax error to be accepted, then part of the OpenSource spirit could be to > feed these patches back to the community for general consumption. Bill > seems to agree with me here -- now all we need is some patches by able > programmers (this excludes myself - I'm mostly only good for dirty hacks) > to introduce some further configuration settings for these eventualities. > > I haven't deployed Courier MTA yet, but hearing that I will probably have > to hack it myself because M$ couln't get their act together, is a blacklash > against "install once and not worry afterwards". It'd be rather sad if a > general conseus were to be established that cautioned prospective users not > to deply Courier MTA because it doesn't make an effort to be compatible > with the flawed world of Windows. Wouldn't it be great to have > compatibility as a further advantage on the list of features? I think so. > > - Gregor > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! > Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and > the chance of winning an Apple iPod: > http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en > _______________________________________________ > courier-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by:Crypto Challenge is now open! Get cracking and register here for some mind boggling fun and the chance of winning an Apple iPod: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0031en _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
