1 |
On Sat, 2004-03-27 at 22:47, Aiko Barz wrote: |
2 |
> That reminds me of something: There is no qmail-ldap, at least no |
3 |
> working one. ;) |
4 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45875 |
5 |
> |
6 |
> PS.: This mail is powered by gentoo/qmail-ldap |
7 |
|
8 |
We are running Gentoo with qmail-ldap on a production machine, handling |
9 |
email for approx 500 user accounts. At the time of installation (early |
10 |
Jan) I was unaware of the chroot.de ebuilds, so we're using the ones |
11 |
from portage with a few patches to fix various problems. See: |
12 |
|
13 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38109 |
14 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38129 |
15 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38229 |
16 |
|
17 |
Please note that I'm not recommending that you use these instead of the |
18 |
chroot.de ones (for one things, chroot.de is more up to date!). |
19 |
|
20 |
I understand that the qmail-ldap maintainer, Benjamin Coles (sj7trunks), |
21 |
is a volunteer (just like all the other Gentoo folk). I know we can't |
22 |
expect the same reponse as we'd expect from a paid employee. At the same |
23 |
time, I think the current qmail-ldap situation in Gentoo is appauling - |
24 |
we are making it extremely difficult for sysadmins to make the move to |
25 |
Gentoo, both technically, and at a management level (how can I sell |
26 |
Gentoo as a mail server when the STABLE qmail-ldap ebuilds in portage |
27 |
are broken, and have been for months?). |
28 |
|
29 |
A quick check of Bugzilla shows 12 open qmail-ldap bugs, all with |
30 |
supplied patches but little or no comments from Gentoo devs. |
31 |
|
32 |
Please don't take this as a flame, or a slight against sj7trunks. I'm |
33 |
not suggesting that he shouldn't be the qmail-ldap maintainer, but |
34 |
perhaps we need one (or more) others to assist? |
35 |
|
36 |
Andrew Ross |
37 |
Webmaster (former sysadmin) |
38 |
Whitley College |
39 |
http://www.whitley.unimelb.edu.au |
40 |
|
41 |
|
42 |
-- |
43 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |