Jeremiah Foster
2005-Sep-21 12:01 UTC
[Pkg-exim4-users] Fwd: Debian exim (was: [exim] which linux for exim)
Begin forwarded message:> From: Jeremiah Foster <jeremiah.foster@gmail.com> > Date: September 21, 2005 1:58:08 PM CEST > To: Marc Haber <mh+exim-users@zugschlus.de> > Subject: Re: Debian exim (was: [exim] which linux for exim) > > > On Sep 20, 2005, at 5:37 PM, Marc Haber wrote: > >> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 08:53:29 -0400, Marc Sherman >> <msherman@projectile.ca> wrote: >>> 2) The Debian package maintainers have customized and modified the >>> Exim >>> config mechanisms quite aggressively, in an effort to handhold those >>> same clueless newbies. > > So heartwarming to read in black-and-white the deep respect developers > have for users. > >>> By doing so, they''ve obsoleted much of the >>> existing documentation and faq material available on the net for >>> exim. > > No, the majority of the documentation is still relevant. >> >> I have to object about that. Most documentation and FAQ material only >> quote a router, a transport or an ACL snippet, which is as easily put >> into our configuration scheme as it is in a hand-crafted exim.conf. >> The issue is that our exim is useable for people who didn''t read a >> line of docs, and simply don''t know the difference between a router >> and a transport. That problem would be there as well if our >> configuration scheme would operate on a monolithic exim.conf. > > I offer my own experience as case in point. I had virtual users > working within 48 hours of apt-getting exim 4.50, with authentication. > Marc''s point is valid, you can run exim out of the box on debian > without any knowledge of SMTP or mail in general. >> >>> This has the effect of steepening the learning curve quite >>> drastically >>> for people who are just beginning to leave clueless newbie territory. >> >> All people need is to read the docs. They don''t. > > This is partly true. The debian documentation is not centrally > located, obtuse, and has tangential relevance to the documentation on > the main exim web site. A smaller spec file is a more realistic option > as is greater participation by the community to maintain wikis etc. I > have followed Marc''s suggestion to create a document informing people > of where documentation lives. My preliminary document is here - > http://devmodul.com/documentation/exim/ > exim4_debian_documentation.shtml Please note this is a work in > progress. >> >>> This problem is easily avoided by those with clue, who can simply >>> install a standard exim config file as /etc/exim4/exim4.conf. All of >>> the debian config mechanism will still be there on disk, but you can >>> ignore it. >> >> Of course, the _really_ clueful people use the gazillions of hooks >> that we provide to get their own customized config _and_ our updates >> to the parts they didn''t change. > > Clue is an unfortunate term. It is condescending and perjorative. The > issue really is how easy is it to install and run and how clear is the > documentation. To state that all failures running exim4 are due to the > "clueless newbies" is specious and indicative of the willful disregard > free software porgrammers in general have for users. No wonder tools > like Ubuntu are so popular, the world wants to use secure, good > software but installing debian is nearly impossible for many people. > This is not a fault of the users, this is a fault of the developers. >> >>> 3) Debian''s incredibly long stable release cycles mean that there are >>> very significant periods of time where Debian will be shipping as >>> "stable" a very outdated (and possibly buggy) version of Exim. This >>> is >>> exacerbated by the fact that the actual "make release here" point is >>> chosen by Debian''s release managers without much real warning (or >>> rather, too much real warning, leading to a wolf-crying situation), >>> and >>> as a result, Debian will often ship as stable a relatively immature >>> x.x0 >>> or x.x1 release. >> > How can debian ship both an "outdated" and "immature" release under > stable? This seems a contradiction. > >> Debian potato had exim 3.12, Debian woody shipped with exim 3.35, >> IIRC, which is hardly a "relatively immature" release, and Debian >> sarge has 4.50 which works actually very well. >> >>> For example, the current Debian stable release >>> contains exim 4.50. While many of the fixes from 4.51 were >>> backported >>> into Debian''s 4.50 package before Debian went stable, it would >>> probably >>> have been better served to stick with 4.44, which had had 4 minor >>> point >>> releases to stabilize before the major new features of 4.50 were >>> introduced. >> >> Do you want to maintain the package? If we''re doing really as bad a >> job as you suggest, I''m happy to step back for you. Just say so. >> >>> This _will_ be a problem for you if you choose to install Debian >>> stable. >> > From my experience, if you can install debian you can install and > maintain exim. > > Jeremiah > >Jeremiah Foster http://www.devmodul.com jeremiah.foster@devmodul.com Tel/Mobil: +46 (0)730 930 506 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 5278 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-exim4-users/attachments/20050921/df7fdad8/attachment.bin