Re: Why Red Hat is not distributing qmail

[Dave Sill]

Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>The basic problem is that [Dan doesn't] trust Redhat.

Good for him! He'd be a fool to trust them. There's no basis for trust 
between them.

>If [he] trusted them, then [he] would give them the freedom to
>distribute modified binaries.

If pigs had wings...

>Redhat is returning that distrust.

Good for them! (See above.)

>Not only that, but Donnie is so confident that [Dan has] sufficiently
>marginalized [him]self that he isn't going to bother to dispute
>[him].

I don't think thats it, really. I think Donnie/Red Hat are simply not
sufficiently motivated to include qmail in RHL. I suspect their
reasoning goes something like this:

    Sendmail is *the* UNIX mailer. Everyone knows how to work it. It's
    well documented, well proven, and hopefully most of the major bugs
    have been found. We can tweak the source any way we see fit. Not
    many (paying) customers are complaining about it. Sure, qmail is
    better, but when we compare the benefits to the costs, it doesn't
    make economic sense to switch.

-Dave