Tracy R Reed([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 01:56:03AM -0700: > Wade Curry wrote: > >resolve an already resolved issue, and cause another one. If > >qmail-local were able to be dropped-in as and MDA for any MTA, > >now *that* would be an ideal resolution, IMO. > > What's special about qmail-local?
Here's the manpage for anyone who wants to look: http://www.qmail.org/man/man8/qmail-local.html It's the part of qmail that does local delivery and forwarding. It understands the dot-qmail files and allows users to add extension addresses at will. It's the part of qmail that I like. Other than dropping invalid SMTP sessions, qmail has done very well for me for several years. It is long in the tooth, though. I hope it sees some activity now that it is in the public domain Even more than that, I'd like to see the whole e-mail paradigm change. I think it's a tired, overworked abstraction. It seems to me that the "it's just like mail, except electronic" encourages specific kinds of abuses and faux pas. I don't think people will actually let that go, though. In the meantime, my wife and kids use Linux only, and they all use the mail server I set up. They know they can give unique addresses on the fly, and they often do. In fact, my wife will create addresses for /me/ on the fly if someone asks. She knows I can always filter/bounce/whatever those e-mails later quite easily. I don't mean that it couldn't be done effectively with postfix and procmail. It's just that they understand this, and it gives them some amount of control without requiring a lot of technical knowledge. Makes a good fit, so I'm not inclined to toy with it. Wade Curry syntaxman -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
