- Previous message: Covington, Chris: "Re: internal backup mailserver"
- Maybe in reply to: /dev/rob0: "Sendmail X [ot?]"
- Next in thread: Covington, Chris: "Re: Sendmail X [ot?]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Covington, Chris:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 07:33:10PM -0600, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> > I don't think it's completely off topic to mention here that Sendmail X
> > has been released. It looks interesting ... well, it looks a lot like
> > Postfix, really. :) Congratulations to Claus A?mann and contributors.
> >
> > http://sendmail.org/sm-X/
>
> Is this a fork of sendmail or the next version? Why bother? No I'm not
> trying to sound like a Postfix snob, just wondering why they didn't
> recommend a move to Postfix instead of designing something similar
> that's so incompatible with the existing userbase.
> Probably because sendmail.com needs to make money.
The advantage of starting from scratch is that you can skip over
many generations of mistakes.
However, writing an MTA from scratch that has all the functionality
of Sendmail, Postfix, etc., is a huge amount of work, and the later
you start, the more work lies ahead, as the competition keeps
evolving too.
Attached is a time line of source line counts of Sendmail, Postfix
and qmail.
Wietse
