Please end this thread. Enough has been said.
VeNoMouS writes:
> in short, YES, because how is it related to what any one here reads,
I'm someone here. I'm reading your latest post. Surely, by your own
standards, I have a right to reply to it.
> as far as ive seen this has been a post a q and answer forum,
For six months it was a q and
in short, YES, because how is it related to what any one here reads, as far
as ive seen this has been a post a q and answer forum, not hi im gonna state
my fucking opinion on what ever the fuck i feel like, who died and made you
ceo of inter7?
as i said before, take it to personal emails and leave
Hi,
I apparently made a mistake between Paul Theodoropoulos and Paul Allen
in replying to some emails written to the list. I apologise for the
mis-understanding.
Regards,
Rick
Paul Theodoropoulos wrote:
Hi,
Sorry if that's the case. Entirely possible. I was just responding
to the last
VeNoMouS writes:
[A load of crap]
So you quote the WHOLE of my mail to lecture me about wasting bandwidth
and brainwidth in the mailing list and post it to the mailing list.
Please find a dictionary and look up the meaning of the folliwing words:
"hypocrite" and "moron."
--
Paul Allen
Softfla
dude get a fucking hint, WE DONT CARE ABOUT THIS BS IN THE PUBLIC FORUM!
- Original Message -
From: "Paul L. Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 11:47 AM
Subject: [vchkpw] Re: Tom's fork of vpopmail (and q
Hello Rick
Rick Macdougall writes:
> I think Tom and Ken have resolved their issues off list
So it appears. Ken has not resolved my issue with his involvement with
vpopmail.
> and we
We??? Do you claim to speak for everyone on the list? Surely not
because at best you can speak for everyone
Hi Paul,
I think Tom and Ken have resolved their issues off list and we would
appreciate it if you did the same. I've held off posting on this topic
for a long time now just because I didn't want to waste more bandwidth.
If Tom or Ken has an issue, it may belong on the list, if you personally
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:27 AM
Subject: [vchkpw] Re: Tom's fork of vpopmail (and qmailadmin)
>
> Robert Kropiewnicki writes:
>
> > I've spoken definitively to no such th
Thursday, September 11, 2003 10:27 AM
Subject: [vchkpw] Re: Tom's fork of vpopmail (and qmailadmin)
>
> Robert Kropiewnicki writes:
>
> > I've spoken definitively to no such thing. What Ken Jones will do now
> > that he has been granted admin access (bravo Tom!) is
Robert Kropiewnicki writes:
> I've spoken definitively to no such thing. What Ken Jones will do now
> that he has been granted admin access (bravo Tom!) is not at the core of
> my argument. My argument is that he has done enough in the past for
> vpopmail development to warrant his inclusion as
Well said. I am another person that has not contributed very much to
wonderful development that Ken and his team have done over past several
years. Bill has also contributed greatly to this product.
Any person that has contributed as much to this project as they have
should be have full access
> Paul L. Allen
>
> Robert Kropiewnicki writes:
>
> > Do you work for Inter7? Can you speak definitively to the fact that
> > they've shelved vpopmail for good on their end? No, you can't.
>
> And can you speak definitively to say that they haven't?
> Despite Ken's
> sudden re-appearance here, ca
My first and only e-mail
Like most of the people who are members of this list, we are the benefactors
of your work over the past many years. I take vpopmail and qmailadmin,
customise them to add in our own features, in a production environment and
our clients are happy with them. We contributed
My 2 cents.
I'm not satisfied both with the last year of Inter7 and the SF period.
I've seen a lot of changes done, but I've the strong feeling that there is
no coherence in the architecture of vpopmail, anymore.
Too much programmers at work, no analists.
No "-enable" on configuration for new
Robert Kropiewnicki writes:
> Do you work for Inter7? Can you speak definitively to the fact that
> they've shelved vpopmail for good on their end? No, you can't.
And can you speak definitively to say that they haven't? Despite Ken's
sudden re-appearance here, can you positively, definitely s
Let us stop this now and put this war behind us. I can see that Tom has
added Ken as an admin. Cheers to Tom and Ken
Regards Manvendra
On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 19:39, Benjamin Tomhave, CISSP wrote:
> First off, everybody needs to quit whining. Seriously, if Tom hadn't
> taken up the reins, there wou
> Benjamin Tomhave wrote:
>
> First off, everybody needs to quit whining. Seriously, if Tom hadn't
> taken up the reins, there would be ZERO DEVELOPMENT on this
> project right
> now. Unless you were willing to send a truck of cash to Inter7, they
> would often not even respond to emails asking
Hi,
On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 16:09, Benjamin Tomhave, CISSP wrote:
> First off, everybody needs to quit whining. Seriously, if Tom hadn't
[snip]
Just my sniping comment... I am so very sorry for being a whining
sleeping idiot! I will say thanks to Tom, stop being a sysadmin and go
back to kinderga
Ladies & Gents,
Before I get off the list, let me this useless non-contributing newbie say
something.
Whats happening here over the past few days will do no one any good. Shooting
off like that in e-mails will just simply piss everyone involved off.
So I sincerly hope that everyone will now just
First off, everybody needs to quit whining. Seriously, if Tom hadn't
taken up the reins, there would be ZERO DEVELOPMENT on this project right
now. Unless you were willing to send a truck of cash to Inter7, they
would often not even respond to emails asking whether development would
continue, let
I agree, but Ken says that 'now and at any time in the future'
which seems to be a misunderstanding? If Ken starts to contribute to the
project quite much then you wouldnt refuse his request perhaps?
The thing is that you contradict in what you say.
"Michael Bowe has been actively involved with v
On Tuesday 09 September 2003 6:35 pm, Michael Bowe wrote:
> Ken and Inter7 deserve credit for all the work they have put
> into vpopmail and the associated admin packages.
>
> Sourceforge is a great place for hosting open source software.
> The tracker system allows bugs, patches, feature requests
I completely agree with every syllable. I would also love for this
thread to end.
-Chris
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Bowe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 3:35 PM
> To: vpopmail list
> Subject: Re: [vchkpw] Re: Tom's f
Ken and Inter7 deserve credit for all the work they have put
into vpopmail and the associated admin packages.
Sourceforge is a great place for hosting open source software.
The tracker system allows bugs, patches, feature requests etc
to be handled in an orderly fashion.
Tom deserves credit
Hello all,
I figured I'd throw in my 2 cents on the matter. Please note, I'm not a
programmer and do not claim to be one. My views are purely from the
standpoint of someone who has been using vpopmail happily for a couple
of years now. It is one of the first open source software packages I
had
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Tom Collins wrote:
> I have forked ownership since I felt that Inter7 was doing a poor job
> of maintaining vpopmail and qmailadmin. I readily acknowledge that Ken
> created vpopmail and qmailadmin. They're GPL projects, so I'm free to
> fork them if I like. Since moving the
At 11:22 AM 9/9/2003, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote:
At 09/09/03 09/09/03 -0700, Tom Collins wrote:
Ken Jones hasn't contributed to vpopmail and qmailadmin development since
March. We've had 12 qmailadmin releases and 7 vpopmail releases since
then. Managing the projects on SourceForge keeps ever
At 09/09/03 09/09/03 -0700, Tom Collins wrote:
Ken Jones hasn't contributed to vpopmail and qmailadmin development since
March. We've had 12 qmailadmin releases and 7 vpopmail releases since
then. Managing the projects on SourceForge keeps everything out in the
open, and allows anyone to cont
My only two points:
1) *IF* there is a fork, with two codebases, follow the others'
suggestions and name the new fork differently so that we can have sane
discussions about which program we are dealing with on any given matter.
2) *IF* there is a fork, and for either fork, manage releases and bug
Rick Romero wrote:
On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 12:30, Tom Collins wrote:
On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 10:07 AM, Ken Jones wrote:
Just so everyone knows. Tom Collins is attempting
to fork the vpopmail project. He refuses to let me
share ownership of the vpopmail and
Hi,
On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 19:51, Rick Romero wrote:
> > Ken Jones hasn't contributed to vpopmail and qmailadmin development
> > since March. We've had 12 qmailadmin releases and 7 vpopmail releases
> > since then. Managing the projects on SourceForge keeps everything out
> > in the open, and
On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 12:30, Tom Collins wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 10:07 AM, Ken Jones wrote:
> > Just so everyone knows. Tom Collins is attempting
> > to fork the vpopmail project. He refuses to let me
> > share ownership of the vpopmail and qmailadmin
> > projects on source forg
Hi,
On Tue, 2003-09-09 at 19:30, Tom Collins wrote:
> I have forked ownership since I felt that Inter7 was doing a poor job
> of maintaining vpopmail and qmailadmin. I readily acknowledge that Ken
> created vpopmail and qmailadmin. They're GPL projects, so I'm free to
> fork them if I like.
On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 10:07 AM, Ken Jones wrote:
Just so everyone knows. Tom Collins is attempting
to fork the vpopmail project. He refuses to let me
share ownership of the vpopmail and qmailadmin
projects on source forge. When I asked him to
add me as an owner on the project he said h
35 matches
Mail list logo
