On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 01:10, John Johnson wrote: > This is not good.. This makes it so you have to select to use the new > qmailadmin > and not use tmda or use tmda and not the new qmailadmin. This has > broken qmailadmin for me and to call it a stable release when > something is broken is just > not fare. I am not attacking anyone just voicing my frustration.
Also, I don't see you paying Tom or anyone else to fix the problem you have with qmailadmin, so I don't think it's fair that you can really whine about the fact that your needs weren't catered to personally. (I could be mistaken, you may have paid Tom, but I'm guessing not).
um, you might want to lighten up. he has a reasonable gripe, and he stipulated at the end that he was just voicing frustration. that's perfectly legitimate. part of what spurs a development community is voices from the community that uses the software. if nobody cares, then what's the point?
i don't use tmda, but with the absurd, horrendous volume of spam that we're all confronted with, i think it's a matter of time before my customers demand it. i'd like to see the option there, though i don't have the urgency of someone who is currently using it.
Anyways, it's free software, if you want it fixed, I'm sure he'd be happy to look at a patch that you provide :)
not all of us are programmers. we appreciate the effort that goes into writing software. we ask for features. it's great when their implemented, frustrating when not, wouldn't you agree?
he voiced frustration. chill.
Paul Theodoropoulos http://www.anastrophe.com
