Re: The sendmail discussion...
Brian T.Schellenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/28/2002 05:07 AM To: Robert L Sowders [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gregory Neil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: The sendmail discussion... |On Thursday 28 March 2002 06:39 am, Robert L Sowders wrote: || Greg is absolutely correct. || || These whiners, who constantly moan for code while never contributing any, || should contribute the code if they want it changed. || || Also I shudder to think that those who customize their systems would || actually learn how to use all the tools available to them to prevent a || makeworld from overwriting or undoing their customizations. :) |I was sorta wondering about that . . . |The whole mailwrapper takes care of this anyway, doesn't it? At least that's |what it's there for . . . don't you just re-install the port and voila! life |is good again? || I wish that we could assign a bitch rating to some of these emails. Say a || sliding bitch scale depending on how much code the bitchee has || contributed. Then they could easily be filtered to /dev/null. || Waddayathink? ;) |So what you are saying is that you never want people to use (or at least to |customize) FreeBSD unless they are FreeBSD developers? My original email was from anger and I'm sorry, what I should have said was that people that customize their systems and then want to upgrade it, should learn to use make.conf and cvsup refuse files so their customizations don't get over writtian, or at least not complain about it when it does if they can't be bothered. I also believe that the NetBSD syspkg idea is neato. My apologies to everyone. |That's the most extreme version of we won't care about who uses it that |I've ever heard. The fact is, it's a lot more convenient for all FreeBSD |users if the user base is expanded because it makes hardware and software |vendors pay more attention to FreeBSD. Ok beat me whip me, I been bad, I know. But I do care none the less. |So *some* accomidation to people who are at least willing to get their hands |dirty with scripts is in the interest of the entire FreeBSD community. Sure, |you don't want to lose all the benefits of FreeBSD in a mad rush to |accomodate the masses -- I left the Linux fold in part becuase I felt that |the mainstream distributions, at least, were going too far to do that, but |it's certainly possible to go too far in the other direction as well. || Much ado about nothing, so far, RTFM. |-- |Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) |Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) | ME -- http://www.babbleon.org |http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
Greg is absolutely correct. These whiners, who constantly moan for code while never contributing any, should contribute the code if they want it changed. Also I shudder to think that those who customize their systems would actually learn how to use all the tools available to them to prevent a makeworld from overwriting or undoing their customizations. :) I wish that we could assign a bitch rating to some of these emails. Say a sliding bitch scale depending on how much code the bitchee has contributed. Then they could easily be filtered to /dev/null. Waddayathink? ;) Much ado about nothing, so far, RTFM. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
Robert L Sowders([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2002.03.28 03:39:51 +: Greg is absolutely correct. yes, i agree These whiners, who constantly moan for code while never contributing any, should contribute the code if they want it changed. being a terrible c-coder i have to admit that, after having a warm fuzzy feel in the freebsd community since years, i did not contribute more than a single line of code (wich, when i recall it right, was a fix to the overall limit of FD_SETSIZE inducing severe resource limitations to a variety of daemons, including apache, that could not open more than 256 files/sockets at once). what i did here in germany was to convince customers that freebsd was much more stable and performant for their setups than other os alternatives, and that, if i am allowed to say, with success. with my heritage from systems administration and systems deployment, i am neither a kernel hacker nor a c-wizard, but that's okay (in my opinion, of course) for me. what i did and do contribute are ideas (well, some may have been pretty wacky) and i highly appreciate the effort of all contributing people, creating a serious amount of high-quality code and answering the many questions posted on the mailing lists. Also I shudder to think that those who customize their systems would actually learn how to use all the tools available to them to prevent a makeworld from overwriting or undoing their customizations. :) this, i already learned quite a long time ago, but this does not really fix the -RELEASE giving no option on how to select subsystems before they are installed in the filesystem during bootstrap installation. and, yes, i did an own release based on -STABLE for internal use for quite some time, but this turned out to be a very time-consuming process. I wish that we could assign a bitch rating to some of these emails. Say a sliding bitch scale depending on how much code the bitchee has contributed. Then they could easily be filtered to /dev/null. Waddayathink? ;) ;-) i know, that my posts on the base dist completeness issues did not gain me a hundred points in core and the rest of the community, but i perceive the reality my way, in my eyes, thus certainly biased, too. i also get your point that, with my bitch level, my reputation in the community might not have improved in the last days, but the lack of package installation manifests in general (mainly for contrib/*) is an important point in freebsd installation, deployment and administration. i and several other people do not consider this as a bikeshed question, but you are right, that code does not write itself. therefor - in my little spare time - i am currently looking into installation tracking and also netbsd's syspkg concept and implementation. Much ado about nothing, so far, RTFM. you of course mean the fine manual that comes with /usr/src/release ;-) since i spun off the whole mess, that obviously upset a lot of people, and i've received several very emotional responses (which, i must say, have nothing to do with discussion of the technical issue) i will look into the options mentioned above and contact the responsible folks when i got something done. i have to add, that i never had the impression of the freebsd community in general being based on emotions rather than on technical facts. i really appreciate that greg spent his time on writing down his point of view, the facts about his part in the sendmail/freebsd and the problems he is seeing. his mail perfectly illustrates the professional attitude behind the development of freebsd, and this spirit makes it the favourite server os for many people throughout the world. regards, /k -- Gravity is an unforgiving motherfucker. KR433/KR11-RIPE -- WebMonster Community Founder -- nGENn GmbH Senior Techie http://www.webmonster.de/ -- ftp://ftp.webmonster.de/ -- http://www.ngenn.net/ GnuPG 0x2964BF46 2001-03-15 42F9 9FFF 50D4 2F38 DBEE DF22 3340 4F4E 2964 BF46 My mail is GnuPG signed -- Unsigned ones are bogus -- http://www.gnupg.org/ Please do not remove my address from To: and Cc: fields in mailing lists. 10x msg36686/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: The sendmail discussion...
On Thursday 28 March 2002 06:39 am, Robert L Sowders wrote: | Greg is absolutely correct. | | These whiners, who constantly moan for code while never contributing any, | should contribute the code if they want it changed. | | Also I shudder to think that those who customize their systems would | actually learn how to use all the tools available to them to prevent a | makeworld from overwriting or undoing their customizations. :) I was sorta wondering about that . . . The whole mailwrapper takes care of this anyway, doesn't it? At least that's what it's there for . . . don't you just re-install the port and voila! life is good again? | I wish that we could assign a bitch rating to some of these emails. Say a | sliding bitch scale depending on how much code the bitchee has | contributed. Then they could easily be filtered to /dev/null. | Waddayathink? ;) So what you are saying is that you never want people to use (or at least to customize) FreeBSD unless they are FreeBSD developers? That's the most extreme version of we won't care about who uses it that I've ever heard. The fact is, it's a lot more convenient for all FreeBSD users if the user base is expanded because it makes hardware and software vendors pay more attention to FreeBSD. So *some* accomidation to people who are at least willing to get their hands dirty with scripts is in the interest of the entire FreeBSD community. Sure, you don't want to lose all the benefits of FreeBSD in a mad rush to accomodate the masses -- I left the Linux fold in part becuase I felt that the mainstream distributions, at least, were going too far to do that, but it's certainly possible to go too far in the other direction as well. | Much ado about nothing, so far, RTFM. | | | | To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | with unsubscribe freebsd-stable in the body of the message -- Brian T. Schellenberger . . . . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) ME -- http://www.babbleon.org http://www.eff.org -- GOOD GUYS -- http://www.programming-freedom.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gregory Neil Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: : 1. Convert FreeBSD into a bunch of packages and let binary installations :with sysinstall (or some future installer) pick and chose or pick :from a short list of standard systems. Offer alternatives where :available. netbsd just did this with their syspkg stuff. : 2. Finish the /etc/rc.d/ work so it mirrors the /usr/local/etc/rc.d/ :system the ports already use. That way a buildworld with :NO_SENDMAIL=yes in /etc/make.conf or not installing the sendmail :package in the future sysinstall (see previous item) would prevent :an /etc/rc.d/sendmail from being installed. I'd love to see this as well. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 12:01:31 -0800 From: Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Matthew Whelan wrote: (my company demands that all software I write, including in my own free time, is copyright by them) You need to move to California, where this is against the law. Minor correction: You need to move to California, where such contractual clauses have been rule unenforceable by the courts (many times). IANAL! R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: +1 510 486-8634 To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
(my company demands that all software I write, including in my own free time, is copyright by them) You need to move to California, where this is against the law. Every California company I've worked for has made me sign a statement with the above stipulation. In order to avoid this, I was required to specifically describe projects I worked on prior to my employment that were immune from these restrictions. It may be illegal, but I'm guessing that you and I don't have the legal resources to fight it in court should an occasion if the employer wanted to be enforce the statement, which was signed voluntarily. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
California Labor Law (was Re: The sendmail discussion...)
Kevin Oberman wrote: From: Terry Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Matthew Whelan wrote: (my company demands that all software I write, including in my own free time, is copyright by them) You need to move to California, where this is against the law. Minor correction: You need to move to California, where such contractual clauses have been rule unenforceable by the courts (many times). This is getting incredibly off topic for these lists. Followups are set to -chat. You are right, you are not a lawyer. ;^). See California Labor Code, Section 2870-2872, inclusive. http://are.berkeley.edu/heat/laborcode.html http://www.unixguru.com/california_law.html Such provisions are against the public policy of the state. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
28/03/2002 11:39:51, Robert L Sowders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: These whiners, who constantly moan for code while never contributing any, should contribute the code if they want it changed. Hmph. Inability to contribute - whether it be lack of necessary coding knowledge, time constraints or contractual restraints (my company demands that all software I write, including in my own free time, is copyright by them) - does not preclude people from being able to supply valid ideas on how to improve the system. Whines and moans like this will only put off potential users and contributors. Matthew To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
Matthew Whelan wrote: (my company demands that all software I write, including in my own free time, is copyright by them) You need to move to California, where this is against the law. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
On 2002-03-28 13:34, Nate Williams wrote: (my company demands that all software I write, including in my own free time, is copyright by them) You need to move to California, where this is against the law. Every California company I've worked for has made me ... ...which was signed voluntarily. They either make you, or it's voluntary. It can't be both :-) Giorgos. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
On Thu, 28 Mar 2002, Nate Williams wrote: (my company demands that all software I write, including in my own free time, is copyright by them) You need to move to California, where this is against the law. Every California company I've worked for has made me sign a statement with the above stipulation. In order to avoid this, I was required to specifically describe projects I worked on prior to my employment that were immune from these restrictions. Disclaimer: IANAL. California code 2870 states that any invenvtion created without using the employer's equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information and unless the invention was conceived for the existing business or research and development, or it resulted from work that the employee did for the employer that you own it, period. That right cannot be signed away.(illegal provisions of contracts are unenforceable.) Consult your attorney, yadda yadda. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Patrick Greenwell Asking the wrong questions is the leading cause of wrong answers \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
Folks, I hate to be snotty, but gosh, I don't think this thread really belongs in a discussion about -stable. Bad enough that the sendmail created so many me too's but wouldn't -chat be a better place for california laws? Sam -- Just because you're moving fast | BURMA SHAVE doesn't mean that you're really | going anwhere at all! | To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: The sendmail discussion...
At 10:25 PM 3/27/2002 -0800, Gregory Neil Shapiro wrote: I've been purposefully trying to avoid getting involved with the entire should sendmail be in the base OS debate as my input would obviously be biased. However, avoiding a response has become more and more difficult as I've seen unanswered questions, misinformation, and as of late, people either posting what they believe my views to be or asking that I post. As you read this, keep in mind these are *my own personal opinions* and apply all of the standard disclaimers that implies (e.g., some of my facts may be wrong). It's ok if you don't agree with them. I also apologize for the length, but people wanted to hear my views. Think of it this way, it is in reply to 71 posts in the current thread. Feel free to skip sections if you want. The last couple of sections may be of interest to those looking for a solution. So here goes... My place in all of this. I've been involved in supporting sendmail since 1996, once of the primary developers since 1997, working for Sendmail, Inc. since 1998, and finally working on the FreeBSD sendmail distribution since 2000. Someone wrote, Greg Shapiro--who's FreeBSD work may even been supported by Sendmail, Inc. For the record, Sendmail, Inc. does not pay me to keep sendmail up to date in FreeBSD. They pay me to work on the actual sendmail source code and other commercial products. The work on FreeBSD is purely voluntary on my part. That same person wrote, Greg ensures that 'it ain't broke, so don't fix it.' Thanks. :) Another statement I would like to correct was: 3) We'd lose the contribution of Greg if sendmail was moved out of the core system. (Could this possibly be true?? I assume that Greg would eventually become involved in the discourse if it looked like something would actually happen, and his veto would definitely shut down the possibility of doing any of this. Some people are just That Important.) I think people overestimate my role in FreeBSD. I'm only one committer. I don't dictate what is moved in or out of the core system. Ultimately, the FreeBSD community, through the mailing lists, PR and patch submissions, and volunteering, drive the future of FreeBSD. I don't have veto power, I am just Not That Important. I think [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the only group who is Just That Important. I do however worry that sendmail will be moved out of the core system. I've tried to answer the technical reasons below. But on a personal note, sendmail's existence in FreeBSD is what allowed me to become a committer and I would hate to lose the ability to contribute if it were removed. Why is sendmail in FreeBSD in the first place? The reasons are clearly historical. Someone asked, why non-BSD packages are in the distribution. sendmail started as part of the CSRG Berkeley Software Distributions. It wasn't added to BSD or added to FreeBSD, it was just there. Why is sendmail still in FreeBSD? In FreeBSD's case it is still sendmail for what I believe to be three reasons: 1. It's traditionally been sendmail. Don't underestimate the importance of tradition. No, it doesn't necessarily make it right but it does maintain continuity. 2. A large portion of the FreeBSD community use sendmail. Switching it out on them now would cause a large amount of hassles. Users who don't use sendmail have already figured out how to deal with the changes necessary. Switching it out on the others would cause more damage than good. 3. It's my fault. I've heard rumors that before I became a committer, sendmail may have been removed from FreeBSD because it wasn't being actively maintained. I don't know if these rumors are true, but if you are looking for someone to blame, look no further. Someone stated that the underlying reason that sendmail and bind remain in src-contrib is that the maintainers are developing/maintaining at a rate that would make generating port patches and doing port versions prohibitively time consuming. While it is true that packages like sendmail and BIND are under active development, they are not actively developed in the FreeBSD repository. Port versions actually come out faster than base OS versions. Released versions are however imported into the FreeBSD repository. However, you are correct in that the infrastructure surrounding sendmail (e.g., src/etc/mail and the buildworld components) are actively maintained. That probably has kept it in. Someone asked why large, complex packages are part of the system. Personally, I don't think things should be pulled out because of their size or complexity. There are many parts of the FreeBSD system
