Re: Bug#202869: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
Hans Fugal wrote: * Andreas Jellinghaus [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 00:27 +0200] mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendmail. a dependency is set if something is always required, a recommends if is required for the common use, and a suggestion is used if it improved the functionality. so depending on mail-transport-agent is wrong, the recommendation is fine. Mutt can read mail without an MTA, but cannot send mail without one. it does not have to be on the same machine erik
Re: Bug#202869: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 08:33:35PM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote: | Mutt can read mail without an MTA, but cannot send mail without one. | | it does not have to be on the same machine It does in the specific case of mutt. I seem to recall Mutt's developers deciding to specifically /not/ support SMTP and only /usr/bin/sendmail for reasons of minimalism and simplicity. Cameron.
Re: Bug#202869: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
I can imagine a workstation without those packages but it is, IMO, mutilated box. please keep your opinion outside the control file. cron, at friends __need__ an MTA (or to be exact: a /usr/sbin/sendmail app), they will not work without. mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendmail. a dependency is set if something is always required, a recommends if is required for the common use, and a suggestion is used if it improved the functionality. so depending on mail-transport-agent is wrong, the recommendation is fine. or fix the policy to make a clear statement. in that case maybe you want to reassign the bug. BTW, there is no need for exim4-daemon-heavy. There are other lightweight MTA's. I know. but still the dependency dialog is confusing and allmost all MTA even if not configure add poisen to a clean system like useless cron jobs, logfile rotation etc. an unused library only takes up a few inodes and kilobytes of disk ram and thus is easy to bear. an unused MTA however is quite a heavy thing compared to that. take a look at all those silly debconf questions some packages have, and you know why it is a good thing not to install one on a system where you don't need it. Another solution is to prepare a dummy-mta package, which only provides mail-transfer-agent and required by policy /usr/sbin/sendmail and /usr/bin/newaliases binaries to do nothing[1]. sounds like shooting in ones foot to me. If debian has one major policy, it is not to have a policy. debian does not decide what architecture or window manager or mail transport agent your want - you can choose. debian does not decide whether you want a small systme or a big fat installation - you can choose. why should debian insist on installing a mail transport agent where none is needed? and the easy solution is to relax the dependency to a recommendation. The policy supports this. Not that the wording in the policy is perfekt, it could be improved (see my suggestion above) to support the recommendation or to deny this bug report and put an explicit dependency in the policy. sure, this bug report is bigger than mutt, it will affect many other mail readers and apps everywhere as well. closing the bug or marking it as whishlist would be wrong. debian claims not to hide problem. here is one. please accept it and handle it. Regards, Andreas
Re: Bug#202869: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
* Andreas Jellinghaus [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 00:27 +0200] mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendmail. a dependency is set if something is always required, a recommends if is required for the common use, and a suggestion is used if it improved the functionality. so depending on mail-transport-agent is wrong, the recommendation is fine. Mutt can read mail without an MTA, but cannot send mail without one. Whether sending mail is considered simply common use or is a core functionality has been and certainly will be nit-picked. Your argument rests on the former. -- Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est. http://hans.fugal.net/ | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg http://gdmxml.fugal.net/ | WindowMaker, gaim, UTF-8, RISC, JS Bach - GnuPG Fingerprint: 6940 87C5 6610 567F 1E95 CB5E FC98 E8CD E0AA D460 pgpVhuUMAFDkO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#202869: Should MUA only Recommend mail-transfer-agent?
Hi, [ note that I atm have the tendency to say that the Depends should remain... ] Hans Fugal wrote: * Andreas Jellinghaus [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 00:27 +0200] mutt can do many nice things without /usr/sbin/sendmail. a dependency is set if something is always required, a recommends if is required for the common use, and Right, although I normally, I decide from pkg to pkg with this and if the feature needing a package is one of main ones of the software or not. And the MUAs main features are reading and _sending_ mails a suggestion is used if it improved the functionality. so depending on mail-transport-agent is wrong, the recommendation is fine. Mutt can read mail without an MTA, but cannot send mail without one. ... but this is bullshit. I don't need a MTA to send my mail with mutt. I use offlineimap, courier's outbox feature, direct the mail to the local Outbox[1], synchronize it and the _mail server_ sends it out. Or if someone accesses IMAP directly it could set sendmail=/dev/null and set Fcc to the Outbox which has the same effect. There are so many possibilities to send mails from mutt without an MTA.. Yes, sure, this is not the common configuration, but possible and the argument that people using mutt _need_ a MTA is evidently wrong... Grüße/Regards, René [1] set sendmail=~/bin/imap/mailout which contains safecat /home/rene/Mail/INBOX.Outbox/tmp /home/rene/Mail/INBOX.Outbox/new hi Omnic :) -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73 pgpbY9uc6wnP3.pgp Description: PGP signature
