From owner-freebsd-current Wed Apr 12 23: 4:25 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9675E37B9C0 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 23:04:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA31047; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 00:04:21 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id AAA43316; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 00:04:06 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200004130604.AAA43316@harmony.village.org> To: Chuck Robey Subject: Re: Integrating QMAIL in the world Cc: Joe Greco , current@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 12 Apr 2000 21:08:38 EDT." References: Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 00:04:06 -0600 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message Chuck Robey writes: : ALWAYS provide sensible default values, not a bunch of expert questions. If it were up to me, I'd ship with all mailers turned off by default. They are all big, bad and ugly when it comes to security. Sendmail's faults are just more widely publicized than other mailers faults are. However, there's more to making a successful system than just having it be totally secure, it also has to be useful. I will pitch a huge fit about chosing QMAIL to go into the tree. Any mailer more complex than cat will likely get this response from me, although Peter Wemm is working on one that would be good and useful iirc. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message