-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I just wanted to comment that my intent in bringing up the issue of
licensing was certainly not to cause any sort of `range war.' Rather, it was
to put my views on the table as one frustrated user who can't really
recommend qmail due to the licensing restrictions.
I've been programming since 1968 and maintaining multi-user systems since
1980. At this point, part of what I look for in packages I recommend is a
license which allows independent maintainers to offer their services with a
minimum of difficulty. Packages change hands; different people perceive
different needs which do occasionally result in several variations of a
package being available, perhaps under different names. This can create
confusion; it also creates maintenance alternatives for the user.
I can understand Dan's interest in maintaining tight control over
modifications to his work, but this also makes use of his package less
attractive. Effective maintenance involves feedback--the maintainer
produces patches and provides updates to a user base (usually of varying
technical skills) for testing, noting the results. If only one individual
may determine whether a patched binary may be distributed, long-term
maintenance begins to look more risky for less technical users.
Anyway, I will certainly continue to use qmail until something markedly
better comes along. I am impressed with the package and the work that has
gone into it. The fact that I can't recommend it to my support users is my
only real source of frustration.
lilo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBMxKNXp23L4XLlypxAQHjeAQAgVtpJ0wlsSjZZysWVlpHKNXZ2KWWikfJ
vizHqqDJj6E2EXASw8fVESNuqghjdMtVjg7Zggrpl9GwvJA9zkfN6TVmHXjvkpVa
galwXnddCbg32mO7LCwu5bzTYKQ5ZysEuBoMhmJRlR5JmJKNrnEQJiLyCyscJH1S
kOv102uxJwM=
=oz7C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I just wanted to comment that my intent in bringing up the issue of
licensing was certainly not to cause any sort of `range war.' Rather, it was
to put my views on the table as one frustrated user who can't really
recommend qmail due to the licensing restrictions.
I've been programming since 1968 and maintaining multi-user systems since
1980. At this point, part of what I look for in packages I recommend is a
license which allows independent maintainers to offer their services with a
minimum of difficulty. Packages change hands; different people perceive
different needs which do occasionally result in several variations of a
package being available, perhaps under different names. This can create
confusion; it also creates maintenance alternatives for the user.
I can understand Dan's interest in maintaining tight control over
modifications to his work, but this also makes use of his package less
attractive. Effective maintenance involves feedback--the maintainer
produces patches and provides updates to a user base (usually of varying
technical skills) for testing, noting the results. If only one individual
may determine whether a patched binary may be distributed, long-term
maintenance begins to look more risky for less technical users.
Anyway, I will certainly continue to use qmail until something markedly
better comes along. I am impressed with the package and the work that has
gone into it. The fact that I can't recommend it to my support users is my
only real source of frustration.
lilo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBMxKNXp23L4XLlypxAQHjeAQAgVtpJ0wlsSjZZysWVlpHKNXZ2KWWikfJ
vizHqqDJj6E2EXASw8fVESNuqghjdMtVjg7Zggrpl9GwvJA9zkfN6TVmHXjvkpVa
galwXnddCbg32mO7LCwu5bzTYKQ5ZysEuBoMhmJRlR5JmJKNrnEQJiLyCyscJH1S
kOv102uxJwM=
=oz7C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----