On 2007-01-03, at 1625, Joshua Megerman wrote:

... I've even used one of the small patches on your site (the date- localtime patch), although I'm not sure if you wrote it or not (there's no credit in the file itself, and I've seen it credited to 2 different people out there, neither of them you.

i didn't write it. i found it floating around on the internet years ago. i wish i did know who wrote it, i owe them a beer for saving my job a little bit easier every time i've had to tear through headers over the years...

But nevertheless qmail.org links the patch on your site, even if the link is stale these days...).

i didn't realize qmail.org was linking to my site at all. every time i've asked russell about adding a link to one of my scripts or patches, i've basically been ignored- i figured i wasn't a member of their "good old boys club", so it wasn't worth my time to worry about it.

I believe vchkpw already splits them, but I'm not sure. It's easy enough to pass them in whatever form vchkpw has them natively.

vchkpw splits them internally. the checkpassword standard calls for them to be together. either way, it's a minor issue- but there may come a point in the future where a program other than vchkpw may wish to use the "onauth" mechanism when certain services authenticate (courier-authlib comes to mind) and they may not support the concept of separate mailbox id and domain name the same way that vpopmail does.

i know that vchkpw RECEIVES them as one single opaque item from qmail- smtpd, qmail-popup, or any other checkpassword-compliant program.

either way it's a minor issue at this point... unless you're writing the API in your head already?

now i'm really interested in seeing where you take this... again,
feel free to bounce questions or ideas off of me.

Thanks - it's a little overwhelming to get so many kudos from established players when I'm still so new here (even if I have been dabbling for a long time).

i recognize "smart" when i see it. and the fact that you've understood everything i've thrown out there, and come back with intelligent answers and counter-ideas, tells me that you're smart. that's all it is.

and for the record, i don't consider myself to be "established". knowledgable, yes, but... i don't even have a real link on the qmail.org site, and i'm not in google's top ten results for "qmail" (at least i don't *think* i am... no, i'm #22.) the only reason i'm even listed as a developer for vpopmail is because i've sent in a fair number of good patches- tom invited me (yes, i'm honored) but i have yet to actually check anything into the CVS repository at all (rick has been doing that for me, since he knows how to write the "configure" script and i don't.)

so don't feel overhwelmed by me... i'm just some guy who wrote a web site that a lot of people find useful, who knows how to write code, who's been building, running, and now consulting for ISPs for a long time, and who's getting tired of consulting and thinking seriously about jumping back into the full-time job market (and is willing to relocate for the right offer, hint hint anybody...)

| John M. Simpson    ---   KG4ZOW   ---    Programmer At Large |
| http://www.jms1.net/                         <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198 |

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to