interested in Postfix support?
ft at it.su.se
Wed May 22 14:25:57 IST 2002
On Wednesday 22 May 2002 15.05, Julian Field wrote:
> I would just like to echo what Nick has said. Between us, we *will* get
> time to work on your patches at some point hopefully fairly soon, and I
> thoroughly agree that a more OO approach would be better. The reason it
> isn't is historical and due to the way MailScanner was born :-)
Of course =)
> I would much prefer that the development did not fork at this point,
> particularly as supporting it will become a lot harder as I won't often
> know which version of the code people are talking about.
I agree that a fork would be suboptimal, it just seemed like there was no
other solution since the difference between our versions grew so large.
> I (very nearly)
> single-handedly support all 8,000 sites currently using MailScanner in my
> spare time at work, and so extra support load is something that I *really*
> care about.
Might I suggest that you set up the necessary parts to lessen the load on
yourself? If you set up something (sourceforge perhaps) that allows other
people anonymous read access to the CVS repository, CVS diffs via mail and
CVS write access to those you feel confident in giving that to then you would
not have to do it all by yourself.
> So, if you can, please be patient with us. I hope you appreciate the
> Many thanks for your contribution!
Thanks for all the parts you wrote ;)
I would still like people interested in helping development of the Postfix
support and OO rewrites to get in touch with me or the list. Someone with a
hobby site running Postfix and some Perl knowledge would be ideal to start
really using the code. I'm sure there are lots of bugs in there (because
there is so much new code) but the framework is in place. Also people running
Sendmail and Exim needs to test the code, since I could not avoid touching
some of that...
More information about the MailScanner