From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed May 22 16:23:36 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net (harrier.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 268D237B40C for ; Wed, 22 May 2002 16:23:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pool0151.cvx21-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.192.151] helo=mindspring.com) by harrier.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #2) id 17AfRz-000663-00; Wed, 22 May 2002 16:23:23 -0700 Message-ID: <3CEC2849.CBAFE41A@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:22:49 -0700 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christopher Weimann Cc: Andre Oppermann , Adrian Filipi-Martin , FreeBSD Hackers List Subject: Re: tuning a CPU bound server References: <3CEC0E35.26DBB385@pipeline.ch> <20020522181822.A51741@mail.k12us.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Christopher Weimann wrote: > Not intended as a slight against DJB ( althought I do realize it > looked that way ). I LOVE qmail, look at my headers. > > But DJB does not introduce any of Terry's "network effects". Sure he does. By not integrating the patches, he ends up with many patches sitting out there that end up being conflicting, whereas if they had integrated the code, they would not be conflicting. There's really no difference between patches posted to web sites and patches which are posted to usenet. People are in exactly the same boat with qmail as people were with 386BSD, before I wrote the patchkit, and hand-resolved the conflicts between the patches. Of for that matter, the same boat people were in with the UMich LDAP code, until I hand resolved those conflicts, too, and posted my "megapatch" on FreeBSD.org (if you will check the OpenLDAP CVS repository, you will see that "import the FreeBSD patches" was the very first thing they did after importing the UMich code at the very start of the project). Actually, people are worse off. At least with NetBSD and FreeBSD, it was possible to derive code from 386BSD, and the same for OpenLDAP being able to derive code from UMich code. With qmail, the license prevents this. The best you can do, without a license change, or active adoption of the patches by DJB, is form an active community, and then run a "patchkit"-type operation. The more people who use qmail, and need a minor feature tweak that can't be done in the context of configuration data, the larger the conflict domain for the various needs patch sets. I think the qmail user base will never rival the sendmail or postfix user bases because of this. The network shakes apart at a very low level of driving. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message