On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > yeah, well, how come if qpopper is open source it is hosted by eudora -- > isn't that a paid company? and also if you type www.qpopper.org it takes > you to euroda's home page -- not a qpopper home page -- are we just > perfecting a eudora product so they can turn it into a for fee mta? we b > sukkers
it being a paid company means nothing. open source has nothing to do with if the company developing it is profit or non-profit. remember the basic rejection of the "LX" model? i doubt we'll be seeing a fee anytime soon. --Tony .-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-. Anthony J. Biacco Network Administrator/Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.asteroid-b612.org "Strange, but it seems, there's a mutiny brewing inside of me" .-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Hornstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 9:01 AM > To: Subscribers of Qpopper > Subject: Re: 4.0.5b1 + OpenSSL 0.9.6g still not work? > > > >I am appalled that I might have to bust out some low-level trace debugger > >to find out if I can run freakin secure POP3 connections! > > I am appalled that you would consider _not_ doing it. > > The whole point of open-source software is _not_ so you can get software > for free; it's so when problems arise, you have the ability to debug them > yourself (and, of course, add new features to the software, but that's > a seperate issue). > > Unfortunately, you've run into the down side of open-source software; > support and Q&A is one of those things that cost money, so that's where > open-source software isn't so good. There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free > Lunch, and sometimes open-source stuff doesn't always play together. The > solution is generally one of the following. > > - Return the software for a full refund. > - Fix it yourself. > - Wait for someone else to do it. > > If you don't have the ability or time to fix/debug it yourself, then I > would advise purchasing a commercial POP server; they have (hopefully) > used their resources to perform proper testing. If you can't afford > commercial software ... well, I guess you're outta luck, then. I mean, > I don't think anyone HERE is under any obligation to make sure qpopper > works for you. > > >Being nice got me ignored. > > Now _THIS_ really pisses me off. > > What do you think, we're all sitting around, saying, "ha ha, look at > that fool, we really know what his problem is, but we're going to > ignore him just out of spite?". The reality is many of us are busy, > and if this answer isn't obvious to us, we generally don't reply. _I_ > didn't reply because I don't use SSL, so it's not relevant to me. If > the answer is, "Well, I just compiled it out of the box, and it worked > fine for me", how is that going to help you? You could determine > whether or not people were having similar problems by checking the > mailing list archives. I'm not saying that people that have problems > shouldn't post here, _but_ if someone is asking _me_ for help > (especially help I'm providing them FOR FREE), I'm going to expect them > to ask nicely. > > I personally don't ask a question to a public list until I've spent a > few hours debugging the problem, and when I mean debugging, I mean > tracing the source code, turning on debugging, and possibly breaking > out the debugger and stepping through the program to figure out what is > going on. I don't expect EVERYONE to have done that, but as much debugging > as you can is reasonable, and I've never seen a bug report that included > too much information. > > --Ken >
