On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 17:36, Tanner Lovelace wrote: > On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 17:03, Christian J Hedemark wrote: > > Jon Carnes said: > > > Awesome... The only part of the plan I don't like is Qmail - because the > > > author refuses to release it as OpenSource. I much rather prefer Postfix. > > > Not that I'm looking a gift Qmail install in the mouth (so to speak...). > > > > +1. Since this is for the LUG, I think the decision of what MTA to use > > should reflect the LUG's dedication to open source software. While if it > > were my own box I might be more pragmatic about it and consider non-OSS > > solutions, I do think the LUG should be able to say that our services are > > provided 100% on OSS. > > -1, I don't agree with that as a valid reason for what software > we should use. I believe there are other reasons to use > open source/free software, but I don't think we have to absolutely, > positively, 100%, 24/7 be only approved(tm) open source > software. I think we *should* be pragmatic and use whatever > works the best. > > I personally use qmail and like it quite a bit. I haven't > yet found any other mail program that will do everything > qmail will (if anyone can suggest something, please do). > And qmail rocks on underpowered hardware.
+1 On using free software. You can check out all the rants you want here (http://www.linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/#djb) and that about covers it. I feel pretty strongly about this, and I will help at any time to install & maintain either sendmail or postfix as a free solution. I really don't think that the hardware is going to have much trouble with at Celeron or higher processor levels.. Peace. john -- John Beimler [EMAIL PROTECTED] 919-465-9707
