I agree 100%.
there is no reason to change your current strategy of keeping your
server as secure as possible out of the box, what people do with it
after that is there concern.
Charlie Brady wrote:
> We are seriously considering shipping version 4.1 with IMP webmail
> installed, but disable
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 02:35:41PM -0500, Charlie Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We are seriously considering shipping version 4.1 with IMP webmail
> installed, but disabled. There will be a services web form which will
> allow all services to be enabled/disabled.
>
> We are thinking this
Seems very valid. As long as there is a web form to enable/disable the service,
I can think of no reason why not.
On an unrelated topic, any possibility of adding a feature to user creation that
would allow/disallow web access for that user (or maybe a group)?
Just a future wish :) I know you g
I would agree that your current direction of disabling services by default,
allowing the user to easily enable via the e-smith-manager is a good
procedure. What about the further thought for an uninstall option if for
instance webmail isn't enabled why not offer a further option to uninstall
all
Darrell May wrote:
>
> > > What about the further thought for an uninstall option if for
> > > instance webmail isn't enabled why not offer a further
> > option to uninstall
> > > all related packages to free disk space. Thoughts for
> > future versions...
> >
> > OK - my time for devil's advoca
Charlie, that is not a bad idea, however, majority of people will want the
web mail features and documenting on the page for memory issues will be
important.
I just got back from Ontario, testing out my webmail, though most of my
relatives had 56k modems, I did find it gluey when you go back and
I'll play devil's advocate (even though I kinda agree with the
philosophy:)
> 1. Performance. On low memory systems, loading mod_php consumes
> considerable system resources (actually, on any system it does, but it is
> really noticable on low end systems).
How much? What impact? How does this af
Great Idea. Keeps a consistant standand and allows the user to enable and
disable.
Looking forward to the next beta.
Regards
Jeff
> Darrell May wrote:
...
> this on an older, possibly otherwise-obsolete, hardware configuration. I
> snaffled a PII-266 / 128 / 6G machine off a friend, but the backup
> option was a PI-120 / 32/ 1.2G. While no-one is going to use such a
> lowly machine if they can get something better, I am relu
