On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 06:49 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 08:06:21AM -0400, Guy Hulbert wrote:
> > This is one problem of not having a binary package format.
> Binaries of a patched qmail are still forbidden by the qmail license
> :-(.
So in debian you do:
apt-get build-dep PACKAGE
apt-get build PACKAGE
dpkg -i PACKAGE-VERSION.deb
instead of
apt-get install PACKAGE
big deal.
[snip]
> > required to do this is probably too large, given the smaller python
> > community.
> Thanks, but I'd sooner develop in Perl than Python. I do develop in
> both, but qpsmtpd already has a well established community and plugins.
Exactly.
>
> > > Here's the rough outline and implementation order
> > I don't think this is unreasonable but at the moment it seems difficult
> > to find enough resources to put out another release of qpsmtpd.
> I think it's outside the scope of the qpsmtpd focus.
Perhaps. There seems to be a lot of enthusiasm from some quarters :-)
>
> qpsmtpd is a qmail-smtpd replacement first and foremost, and it's still
> a stand-alone component outside any reimplementation of qmail.
Yes, and it the project works because there is a need for what it does.
The idea of rebuilding qmail is interesting but it seems to be
off-topic. There are rumours floating around that DJB is still working
on qmail2 ... i wonder whether we will see it before qmail is entirely
rebuilt in perl ...
--
--gh
