Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-20 Thread Guillermo Llenas






    I have qpopper working with about 20.000 accounts in maildir over
nfs and it works great. Obviously with the patch of the Little Prince
for Maildir. In three years never had a problem.

    -Guille.


The Little Prince wrote:

  windows has been around for years too..doesn't mean it's stable :-)

--Tony
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-
Anthony J. BiaccoSystems/Network Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.asteroid-b612.org

"as I always say, why go Merlot, when you can call a Cab?"
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-

On Thu, 19 May 2005, Roy wrote:

  
  
george wrote:



  Echo that-

I joined to see if it was a good idea to use qpopper...

LOL

Can't tell from this list...
Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.

;)
 

  

Qpopper has been around for years so it's very stable.  The chatter is 
low because of this.

Roy



  
  
  






Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-20 Thread Ken A
I'd only add that the docs are good too!
Ken
Sylvain Robitaille wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2005, george wrote:

Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.

Qpopper is used extensively.  The lack of chatter on this list is
testament to how well it just sits there and does what it's supposed to
do, with very little for us to discuss.
When problems do occur, and they're reported, the developpers are quite
quick to respond and, if it hasn't already been done by then, help
address the problem (even when certain among us who promise to
contribute patches against a current snapshot are slow to deliver --
sorry about that!).  That keeps the list membership happy, which again
results in not much to discuss ...


Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-20 Thread Sylvain Robitaille
On Thu, 19 May 2005, george wrote:

> Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.

Qpopper is used extensively.  The lack of chatter on this list is
testament to how well it just sits there and does what it's supposed to
do, with very little for us to discuss.

When problems do occur, and they're reported, the developpers are quite
quick to respond and, if it hasn't already been done by then, help
address the problem (even when certain among us who promise to
contribute patches against a current snapshot are slow to deliver --
sorry about that!).  That keeps the list membership happy, which again
results in not much to discuss ...

-- 
--
Sylvain Robitaille  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Systems analyst   Concordia University
Instructional & Information TechnologyMontreal, Quebec, Canada
--



Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-20 Thread Alan Brown
On Thu, 19 May 2005, george wrote:

> I joined to see if it was a good idea to use qpopper...
>
> LOL
>
> Can't tell from this list...
> Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.

It works very well for what it's designed to do and it's very stable,
old, heavily tested code.

.BUT.

If you want to provide IMAP facilities, then use another server,
preferably one of the combo packages which does POP3(S) and IMAP(S)
as an integrated job.



Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-19 Thread The Little Prince

windows has been around for years too..doesn't mean it's stable :-)

--Tony
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-
Anthony J. BiaccoSystems/Network Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.asteroid-b612.org

"as I always say, why go Merlot, when you can call a Cab?"
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-

On Thu, 19 May 2005, Roy wrote:

> george wrote:
> 
> >Echo that-
> >
> >I joined to see if it was a good idea to use qpopper...
> >
> >LOL
> >
> >Can't tell from this list...
> >Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.
> >
> >;)
> >  
> >
> Qpopper has been around for years so it's very stable.  The chatter is 
> low because of this.
> 
> Roy
> 
> 


Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-19 Thread Roy
george wrote:
Echo that-
I joined to see if it was a good idea to use qpopper...
LOL
Can't tell from this list...
Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.
;)
 

Qpopper has been around for years so it's very stable.  The chatter is 
low because of this.

Roy


Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-19 Thread Mike
At 5/19/2005 11:46 AM, george wrote:
I joined to see if it was a good idea to use qpopper...
LOL
Can't tell from this list...
Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.
Qpopper has been working smoothly and problem-free for me for years.  I 
have it configured to only accept authentication when the connection is 
encrypted via SSL.  It works like a charm with Eudora on my laptop and an 
openSSL-generated certificate.

I highly recommend it as a POP3 server.  I'm running Qpopper 4.0.7, which I 
installed last month.  I was previously running Qpopper 4.0.5.

--Mike 



Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-19 Thread george
On 5/19/05 2:09 PM, "Ken A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Yep.
> Not much traffic here usually.
> Ken
> 
> 
> WA Support wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I am new to this list, is the the correct email address for the qpopper
>> list?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Wild Apache Support
>> 
>> 
> 

Echo that-

I joined to see if it was a good idea to use qpopper...

LOL

Can't tell from this list...
Either no one uses it, or it works perfect.

;)
-- 
Thanks,
George

Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I
repeat myself.
Mark Twain




Re: New List Member Question

2005-05-19 Thread Ken A
Yep.
Not much traffic here usually.
Ken
WA Support wrote:
Hello,
I am new to this list, is the the correct email address for the qpopper
list?
Thanks,
Wild Apache Support