Quoting Stian Jordet <liste+dovecot@jordet.net>:
man, 12,.06.2006 kl. 14.53 -0700, skrev Chris H.:
Wow. We never should have switched from UW-IMAP to Dovecot. Having a 750,000 user base. We made the switch to Dovecot in an effort to trim a little overhead on our systems. But our OS (FreeBSD 5.4 - UFS) version is rapidly reaching EOL. All future versions will default to UFS2. Dovecot seems to handle UFS correctly. But if we had known that we were required to write our own code to stay onboard with Dovecot, we would have *never* made the switch. It appears that Dovecot is not an appropriate choice for Production systems. But rather; better suited for hobbyists. I sure wish we had known this from the start.
While I "need" xfs quotas badly, and in some way is in the same boat as you, I must say Timo really, really, really is free to do what ever he wants with his spare time. If you had paid big dollars for dovecot, I could have understood your frustration, but now you're just being silly.
-Stian I couldn't agree with you more. It *is* up to Tim as to what he will/ won't do. I never made *any* objection to that. The *only* point I was making here, is that I wish that I had known that it would ultimately be *my* responsibility to insure that Dovecot remains reliable/ useable on my chosen OS (FreeBSD). Given it's wide usage (FreeBSD) and years of experience with UW-IMAP I felt relatively confident that Dovecot would follow suit in an effort to remain competitive with UW-IMAP. In summary; as I clearly stated above; I wish I had known in advance that it would be ultimately be my responsibility to insure that Dovecot remained usable on our OS.
'nuff said.
-- Shameless self-promotion follows... ... or does it?
FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p12 (SMP - 900x2) Tue Mar 7 19:37:23 PST 2006 /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////