Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Fri, 1 Sep 2006 15:58:28 +0200
From:  Michael Stauber <bq (at mark) solarspeed.net>
Subject:  [coba-e:06676] Re: [RFC] bluequartz with postfix MTA
To:  coba-e (at mark) bluequartz.org
Message-Id:  <200609011558.29008.bq (at mark) solarspeed.net>
In-Reply-To:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0609010145580.1727-100000 (at mark) staff.singnet.com.sg>
References:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0609010145580.1727-100000 (at mark) staff.singnet.com.sg>
X-Mail-Count: 06676

Hi Patricko,

>      Now it is time for sendmail replacement / alternative.
>      
>       postfix? anyone?

Postfix is essentially a drop in Sendmail replacement. So it can use the same 
config files and provides the same binaries which external applications might 
use.

BUT: Switching the MTA or providing a 2nd one as alternative for no particular 
gain certainly wouldn't help to move BlueQuartz ahead further. 

To the contrary: Support wise alone this increases the overhead a lot. Not 
only for the BlueQuartz maintainers and list regulars, but also for third 
parties that provide extra software and/or support for BlueQuartz.

There are quite a few people who have extended their MTA with provisions to 
detect and fight SPAM and virii. What they have is working fine now, but if 
you "steal" their current MTA and replace it with something entirely 
different, they have to start from scratch again to get back the same degree 
of virii and SPAM protection they had before. 

Don't get me wrong: I have nothing against Postfix. I use it on most of my 
non- Cobalt and non-BlueQuartz servers. I even have a Debian box sitting in 
my network that runs Exim, which is also not a bad MTA by itself.

As is I think there are a lot more important features that need to be added to 
BlueQuartz than to worry about the MTA. Sendmail is fine.

-- 

With best regards,

Michael Stauber