On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Jean-Paul van de Plasse < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > If some people would make a list of the most important bugs in qmailadmin I > am sure they can be fixed.. > My vote: It is not possible to create an e-mail account when the username is two characters :-) --Adam > I never use vqadmin, so I have no clue about what works or not, but I am > capable of fixing it. > > JP > > On 19 mei 2009, at 19:56, Adam Glass wrote: > > Hi all, > > Although I am new to this list, I have been running a Linux user group for > over a decade, and have done software development that dealt with Open > Source. Perhaps another perspective could be useful. > > It is sad but true that nobody wants to pay for software. No matter how > much we understand the amount of hard work that goes into it, businesses > won't pay for it. If there are two ways to get something done and one of > them is free, most businesses will choose the free route. > > I suspect that the number of Qmail Toaster users would drop dramatically if > you had to either pay for a tool to create multiple virtual domains, or had > to use the CLI to do it. > > Some really good - and good looking - documentation on creating virtual > domains via CLI might help retain some users who would otherwise go > elsewhere, but probably not many. > > I have worked at a software development company that tried to take the > middle ground, charging for add-ons while donating to the core project > (anybody remember Metro-X?). But in the end it was not commercially viable. > > Sorry to be negative about this, but it's what I have seen and > experienced. Right now you have a graphical tool that mostly works, even if > it does have bugs. It is free which means Qmail Toaster is free, so you > have a large user community that advocates for you (which is how I learned > about this project). > > The problems that come from vqadmin's bugs may be easier to live with than > the effects of charging for improved software. > > > --Adam > > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Phil Leinhauser <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I would normally agree with you Steve but this is a bit different. >> >> For the home users with one domain, QControl is free. For anyone running >> more than one domain we are most likely running commercially. QMT and MOST >> of the accessories are free and the service in this forum is better than >> most paid support systems from the big guys like IBM, Dell, MS.... Throwing >> Jake a few bucks for his tool is money WELL spent. These guys are always on >> top of anything and they spend considerable time with updates, patches, etc. >> for NOTHING! I say throw him the business. >> >> VQadmin is BROKE. That fact is noted in several places yet users still >> stumble upon it and cause traffic in here. >> >> Phil >> >> >> > >> > On May 19, 2009, at 11:20 AM, Eric Shubert wrote: >> > >> >> Once again, I'd like to recommend that vqadmin be dropped from QMT. >> >> The problems it has appear to outweigh the benefits it provides, >> >> especially now that qcontrol is available. >> >> >> >> Does anyone have any objections to this? I think it deserves some >> >> discussion. >> > >> > >> > i have no objection per se to dropping vqadmin; however, it seems a >> > bit disingenuous to propose QControl as the appropriate replacement, >> > given that it's commercial software. a statement such as "vqadmin is >> > broken, so we're dropping it; you'll need to use the command-line >> > tools to add and delete domains" would, i think, do a better job of >> > setting appropriate expectations in the minds of users who don't >> > follow this list. >> > >> > -steve >> > >> > -- >> > If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an >> > improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v >> > http://five.sentenc.es >> > >> > >> > > >
