On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Gordon Rowell wrote:
John Peacock wrote:
Matt Sergeant wrote:
A birdy tells me that qpsmtpd will be the default smtp server in the
next release of the e-smith SME server.
That birdy is correct, or you could have asked me instead :-)
And why is first hand news from you any better than first hand news from
me? And after all, switching to qpsmtpd was my idea (mentioned during car
trip, March 4, 2004*). :-)
In other good news from YAPC, I got most of STARTTLS support working, with
forkserver 0.29. I should be able to post usable patches late this week -
I've had no chance to do it earlier thanks to the minor inconvenience of
my DSL provider going out of business while I was up at YAPC :-(
---
Charlie
*)
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Greg Zartman wrote:
http://smtpd.develooper.com/
Have you played with this? If so, what do you think?
Funny you should mention that. I was just in the car with Gordon,
discussing it.
I think it is well written, well maintained, and likely the way to go. One
problem is that it will cost one perl invocation for each arriving
message, which might be a limit on a very busy server. We already carry
that cost for virus scanning with ServiceLink,
AFAIK, nobody has ever packaged qpsmtpd in rpm form. I've been planning to
do so - for quite some time now.
By way of contrast, I did take a look at ASSP some time ago. I seemed to
have been written by Windows programmers who didn't know much about
reliability. I've not been suprised to see users of Darrell's contrib
reporting problems.
