mail gui

[Z]

Paul Iadonisi wrote:

>On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 04:23, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>  
>
>>Even if the sendmail codebase finaly reached the quality of its
>>competitors that's no reason to inflict sendmail conf files on users.
>>    
>>
>
>  Heh.
>
>  I eat sendmail rulesets for breakfast. ;-)
>
>  Never saw anyone use 'inflict' when talking about sendmail conf
>files.  But I guess that's appropos.  The best description I've heard of
>them is that they look like line noise.
>  
>
Now for the stupid question of the day: Why wasn't the config files 
changed to something decent?
Why is it still using cryptic m4 macros to create even more cryptic configs?

>  Oh, and 'quality' may be overstating it a bit.  I've seen core
>sendmail developers mention things like sendmail being full of hacks
>(that's ugly hacks, not cool hacks).  SendmailX is rewritten from the
>ground up, with lessons learned in mind.  We'll have to wait and see how
>well that takes off.
>  
>
The ugly rumor that I heard is that parts of the codebase are too messy 
for an audit. It passed the point
 of "rewrite is less work than fixing" a long time ago.
Anyone tried commercial sendmail? Is it different?