Hi,
On Fri, 30.11.2007 at 14:03:36 -0600, Marco Peereboom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does qmail have the ability to block all email concerning replacing
sednmail in base?
it's not built in (qmail is intended to be lean), but you could give it
a shot using eg. netqmail + qmail-scanner.
Best,
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 03:34:11PM -0800, Bryan Irvine wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 3:19 PM, Andrew Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't such reasoning about a gift apply equally to a BSD-license on
free-as-in-beer software?
Andrew Ruscica wrote:
...
Why the Public Domain Isn't a License
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:27:32AM -0800, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
Is there any interest in replacing sendmail with it to remove
another component from the src/gnu/ hierarchy?
I strongly recommend against this. There's no need for it, and anyone
who insists on running qmail (a course of action
On 30/11/2007, Bryan Irvine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Strangely, it appears that you have no right put something in the
public domain, it just happens 70 years after you die. (Copyright
lawyers feel free to chime in here)
Says who?
Strangely, this is not how it works.
Any copyright owner can
Does qmail have the ability to block all email concerning replacing
sednmail in base?
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:27:32AM -0800, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
Dan Bernstein has placed qmail 1.03 into the public domain (see
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html). Is there any interest in replacing
sendmail
Wouldn't such reasoning about a gift apply equally to a BSD-license on
free-as-in-beer software?
Andrew Ruscica wrote:
...
Why the Public Domain Isn't a License (Linux Journal)
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6225
From the article:
...
Unfortunately, such gifts are illusory. Under basic
No, I think you missed the point of the article. It's trying to say
that you retain copyright like a sticky booger. Merely saying 'this
stuff is in public domain now' is not enough to make it so.
Strangely, it appears that you have no right put something in the
public domain, it just happens 70
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 01:45:02PM -0500, Andrew Ruscica wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:27:32AM -0800, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
Dan Bernstein has placed qmail 1.03 into the public domain (see
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html).
Might be worthwhile reading this (from a US legal perspective
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:27:32AM -0800, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
Dan Bernstein has placed qmail 1.03 into the public domain (see
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html).
Might be worthwhile reading this (from a US legal perspective at least):
Why the Public Domain Isn't a License (Linux Journal)
On Friday 30 November 2007 10:50:09 Gregory Edigarov wrote:
Pete Vickers wrote:
In case it's needed (which I doubt), I'll voice my VERY strongly
preference for sendmail instead of all these other pretenders.
I agree. Please do not remove sendmail. it is the most advanced
opensourced
Matthew Dempsky schrieb:
Is there any interest in replacing
sendmail with it to remove another component from the src/gnu/
hierarchy?
No.
In ports yes, in base no.
I don't see any advantage switching from sendmail to qmail.
...and yes, i know qmail. It was the first mailserver i get in
In case it's needed (which I doubt), I'll voice my VERY strongly
preference for sendmail instead of all these other pretenders.
/Pete
On 30 Nov 2007, at 10:25 AM, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
On 11/30/07, Peter Hessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That being said, its really easy to install qmail
Pete Vickers wrote:
In case it's needed (which I doubt), I'll voice my VERY strongly
preference for sendmail instead of all these other pretenders.
I agree. Please do not remove sendmail. it is the most advanced
opensourced mailer,
I do strongly prefer it.
--
With best regards,
Gregory
Frans Haarman wrote:
Did he change his djbdns license as well !?
From the Google Video
(http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Bernstein+releases+code+public+domain)...
After talking about shortcomings of BSD/GNU licensing...
... as a result of seeing this mess for some decades and thinking
On Nov 30, 2007 9:27 AM, Matthew Dempsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Bernstein has placed qmail 1.03 into the public domain (see
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html). Is there any interest in replacing
sendmail with it to remove another component from the src/gnu/
hierarchy?
This would be very
On 11/30/07, Peter Hessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That being said, its really easy to install qmail yourself and have it
replace the in-tree sendmail (see mailer.conf).
Right, and maybe for a future OpenBSD release you could swap the
placement of sendmail and qmail in that sentence. :-)
To
qmail has a seperate set of problems beyond its license.
That being said, its really easy to install qmail yourself and have it
replace the in-tree sendmail (see mailer.conf).
On 2007 Nov 30 (Fri) at 00:27:32 -0800 (-0800), Matthew Dempsky wrote:
:Dan Bernstein has placed qmail 1.03 into the
hmm, on Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:27:32AM -0800, Matthew Dempsky said that
Dan Bernstein has placed qmail 1.03 into the public domain (see
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html). Is there any interest in replacing
sendmail with it to remove another component from the src/gnu/
hierarchy?
everyone
18 matches
Mail list logo
