On Thursday 06 March 2003 11:37, Rick Romero wrote: > On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 08:38, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > > On Thursday 06 March 2003 09:23, Rick Romero wrote: > > > On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 08:04, Jesse Guardiani wrote: > > > > On Thursday 06 March 2003 00:08, Tom Collins wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > > Anyway, the point of this is: I'd love to see this thing in the next > > > > production release. Is anyone planning a new production release soon? > > > > Or is it still up in the air? > > > > > > Kinda of along these lines, I've implemented the use of a FORM to > > > automatically log users into qmailadmin from IMP. I've noticed on my > > > mailbox, with 50MB in it, the main_menu takes a couple seconds to > > > load.. I think it's because of the 'du'. > > > > > > I hate re-inventing the wheel, so I HAVE to ask why is there a 'du' for > > > doing quotas, when that should already exist in maildirsize? > > > > > > I have my own hack to qmailadmin that I would like to see in the > > > 'release' but I haven't heard any interest in it, so I haven't cleaned > > > anything up. Should I cleanup, and add ifdefs to my 'Service Level' > > > stuff? It current form only works with MySQL, and vpopmail also has to > > > be modified. > > > > Hi Rick, > > > > Sounds like you have some cleanup work to do. Generally, I think any > > developer would much rather include a patch that is clean, clear, and > > works in as many different environments as possible under as many > > different circumstances as possible with a minimum of confusion on the > > user's part. > > <snip> > > Whoops, I meant to add - "Is anyone interested in that functionality?" > I've sent my patches to the vpopmail list for 'documentation' purposes, > but nobody has expressed any interest either way. > > They're small enough that patching my own version of qmailadmin for the > next year will take less time that cleaning it up, and making it work > for everyone. > > So I ask, does anyone want that functionality in qmailadmin, and/or does > anyone have suggestions of a better way to do it, than what I submitted > to the vpopmail list (because it requires a patch to vpopmail also). > > Frankly, I don't consider myself a programmer, and I know it would take > me longer than I'd like to spend on it ;) I spent at least an hour > last night trying to get yesterday's date from Perl. Yes, I know > date()-86000, but apparently that doesn't work if you happen to also > 'use Date::something'.. grumble.. can't remember offhand, but an hour > to get 'yesterday'? I'm not going to tackle making this work for > everyone, if no one else is interested. My wife would kill me :)
I hear ya. That's the name of the game really: Is it worth it? Most of the patches I submit are critical to our customer's happiness. It would be a massive drain on my resources to maintain a patch from release to release, so I much prefer to submit it to the maintainers. Besides, no-one else in my company can write a bit of code, so if I were to leave, my code would leave with me because they wouldn't be able to maintain the patches internally. I consider that bad practice and unacceptable behavior. So... my boss tends to allow me to take the time necessary to make sure my patches are professional, complete, and most importantly: Included in the distribution. As for the functionality: Yes, I'm interested, but maybe not the way you implemented it. (Then again, maybe.) I've been contemplating the very same thing lately, but I'd like to explore all of my other options too. Have a great day! > > > Rick > > > <snip> > > > <snip> -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net We are actively looking for companies that do a lot of long distance faxing and want to cut their long distance bill by up to 50%. Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info.
