On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Gordon Rowell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> These sounds like good goals, and, I believe are totally in line with SME
> Server development over the years. We always avoided forks from upstream
> unless there was no option (templates helped immensely here) and made some
> choices based on best of breed at the time which may be different today (e.g
> qmail saved us from at least one remote sendmail exploits. I'd choose
> Postfix today, but I actually think that change is neutral from a server
> capability p.o.v.).
I don't think I'd point out qmail as a win. Its 'accept everything
and bounce bad addresses later' policy forced me to drop SME as mail
servers long ago. Maybe that was fixed eventually...
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Discussion about project organisation and overall direction
To unsubscribe, e-mail [email protected]
Searchable archive at http://lists.contribs.org/mailman/public/discussion/
