One of our developers wrote the whole LDAP integration in Dovecot, and I for one am not happy with this move.
Jan Hugo
On November 2, 2022 6:16:21 PM GMT+01:00, Dave McGuire mcguire@neurotica.com wrote:
It would certainly be a shame if that sort of thing started happening with Dovecot. Since day one, the Dovecot community has always been very pleasant, friendly, and drama-free. If forks start happening due to profiteering, that will irrevocably change the Dovecot community, with feelings of broken trust.
That would be a shame.
No one decries the commercial side of Dovecot wanting to make money. Timo and others have worked very hard on this project for many years. I was a very early adopter of Dovecot, a refugee from (the awful) Cyrus IMAP server, and I watched it grow up to be a highly useful and widely respected package. Creating a commercial version to reward the developers and fund future development is fine; I applaud it.
But it really smells like the current move with Director is crossing a line.
Those in charge of making this decision would do well to pay very close attention here.
-DaveOn 11/2/22 12:46, Jan Hugo Prins wrote:
I think the only thing they will gain is a community that is angry and will in the end leave the product / fork the complete product.
Jan Hugo
On November 2, 2022 5:39:53 PM GMT+01:00, Brad Schuetz brad@omnis.com wrote:
On 11/2/22 03:54, Aki Tuomi wrote: On 02/11/2022 11:55 EET Frank Wall <fw@moov.de> wrote: On 2022-11-02 09:11, Aki Tuomi wrote: You can also see the email sent by others which shows how you can do this without replication, using proxy and passdb to direct users to right backend. Which is basically what director does. It's not the same thing. It is not critical functionality. You can feasibly run a two-node dovecot system on NFS without having director. It seems to be critical enough to offer a replacement for paying customers, while at the same time leaving the community edition with no valid replacement. Ciao - Frank Can you tell me what kind of functionality you are unable to achieve with the passdb solution? Aki Can you tell us what you are gaining (other than monitarily) by removing a completely functionally working feature that numerous people are using? Adding new paid features is one thing (i.e. nginx), taking away a feature to replace it with a paid feature is something completely different. -- Brad-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.