On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Brett Lymn wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 01:16:29PM -0400, Douglas Wade Needham wrote:
>>
>> What I will say is that at this point, I
>> certainly cannot see any reason a discussion about the possible
>> removal of sendmail could not have been carried out on a list such as
>> this, just as other feature changes are often discussed.
>>
>
> The issue was discussed.  Unfortunately sendmail vs others is one of
> those polarising issues.  There really is no "right" solution, there
> will always be a group of people that will be disenfranchised whatever
> way this went.  I suspect most people will be happy just to have a MTA
> that forwards their mail, for the people that require a specific
> feature set then there is always pkgsrc - if that doesn't cut it I am
> sure that sendmail builds from source without any hassle.
>
> FWIW my preference would have been to leave sendmail in the tree but
> the it was decided it should go.  I shall get over it - pkgsrc or hand
> built will do me.

Or even an announcement before I started seeing cvs commit messages
would be nice.

And I forget what it was, but when I complained about something
recently, one of you core guys said, "This was discussed and decided in
core. Tough noogies." I'm not sure what that means. Do you want me to
fork (not likely) or go to another OS (not likely, but easier for me
than the other option.)

-- 
Hisashi T Fujinaka - htodd@twofifty.com
BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte