----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Guardiani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "vpopmail" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 10:03 AM
Subject: [vchkpw] vpopmail as a daemon

> Greetings list,
> I'm sure people have considered this before, but I'd like to collect
everyone's thoughts on the idea I'm about to present:
> VPopMail as a daemon
> --------------------
> What does everyone think about the possibility of turning vpopmail into a
daemon? Complete with network ports and the like. It would
> allow for a much more distributed architecture, IMHO.
> Currently, if someone wants to run qmailadmin on a separate web server,
they have to create an NFS share, right?

What's wrong with that?

> Wouldn't it make a lot of sense to provide a vpopmail network protocol
that allows connections from remote administrative utilities?

You mean something that takes requests over the network and stores user
information in a database?

> Possibly even implement support for vpopmail clusters (although I'm
thinking you'd have to have a crazy amount of users to need a
> cluster! Vpopmail is pretty darn efficient.)

I've already got a cluster. It works great.

> Programs like sqwebmail would benefit by not having to be recompiled every
time vpopmail is upgraded. The port protocol wouldn't
> change much between versions, and developers could maintain backward

The only time you need to recompile sqwebmail is if the storage format for
the users change. At this point, you'd also need to recompile the software
that talks over the network. Either way you lose.

> Sqwebmail WOULDN'T be able to run on a separate server, as it accesses
maildirs directly, but at least administration, upgrades, and
> general package stability would likely improve a bit.

My sqwebmail install is distributed across machines. Works great.

The general idea is "less code is going to have less bugs", not "more code
is going to have less bugs".

> Who knows. One might even be able to implement a maildir access protocol.
But that would probably just duplicate the functionality
> of the IMAP protocol.

Now that would just be silly.

> Can anyone else think of a good reason why vpopmail might benefit from
being made into a daemon?

Only if you were for some reason religiously opposed to using NFS to
accomplish all the things above. Then again, you could use samba or afs. So
no, I can't think of a good reason.

> Can anyone think of a really good reason why it shouldn't? (Other than the
time it would take to code everything.)

It's too complicated for something that's already small, fast, and simple.
None of the things you suggest can't already be done, or don't really need
to be done.


Reply via email to