On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 08:21:28PM +0100, Henning Brauer wrote:
> [smtproutes vs mailroutes]
> if smtrproutes exists, they should be read and used. so far nothing changes
> against stock qmail.
> if mailrotes exists, the user has abviously read the INSTALL or README.
> There's a good place to mention that mailroutes have precedence over
> smtproutes. I personally would ignore the whole smtproutes file in this case,
> but giving mailroutes precedence makes sense.
Yes. This I like. I'll just ignore smtproutes if mailroutes exists! And
the README (or whatever) will say "cp smtproutes mailroutes" and not "mv"
- that guarantees that things will work as they used to if the user
decides to go back to not using my patch.
The code for reading the files will of course be the same, I'll even use
the same filehandle, just pointing to different files depending on the
existence of control/mailroutes. But I won't tell people you can have
:qmtp in smtproutes as that will break things when you go back to not
using QMTP. Oops, I told...
Thanks, Henning!
-Johan
--
Johan Almqvist
http://www.almqvist.net/johan/qmail/
PGP signature
