[Mailman-Users] 2.1.5 fedora core 3 prevent mailbody problem
cycling at axelrod.plus.com
Tue Jun 14 17:08:19 CEST 2005
>>Standards compliance (fedora) is one thing (I work in standards)
>>but when everyone already has a fine standard (put it in the
>>mailman user directory) and the community has no plans
>>to change that then i find it very silly to just throw
> The directory change was dictated by the need to integrate with the
> SELinux security policy. This is a positive technology advancement.
> Adhering to the FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy Standard) is a stated goal and
> appreciated by many.
> Most people prefer distributions that integrate packages into a coherent
> system that follow established rules.
> Individual package defaults are not a standard.
I note your email address John (redhat.com) and
observe your defensiveness on this.
I differ on this (and I do work in the standards world).
YMMV - there is no right answer and I qualified all the
things above as opinions and tried not to make
personally projective statements of opinion such
as "Most people prefer ...". I completely appreciate the
reasons for the FHS but not the way it is applied
to mailman in the community. One reason for example is that it
means I have to learn TWO standards - the mailman
way and the Fedora way and constantly be mentally
mapping between them - otherwise if I want the latest
update I am dependent on redhat to have packaged it
(which is as bad as Ms.) The *sensible* way to
implement standards with a community is to get
them on board not redesign their work.
If the mailman developer community adopts the FHS for
mailman then that's a different story entirely and
I would follow without complaint.
These are my views, not those of any company
and I'm not claiming any blanket truths except
that standards are only as useful as their
adoption by communities.
The ls -lR of /home/mailman would still be
More information about the Mailman-Users