On 07/28/2014 09:02 PM, Joachim Schrod wrote:
qopper was light-weight. Dovecot is a jack-hammer. It is *not* the other way round.
We are forced to use Dovecot, if we don't want to support our own sources and installation. We are forced to supplant a light-weight POP3 solution by an IMAP jack-hammer that we don't need.
For Daamon that may be the case. For me, its not. Qpopper simply cannot do what I require of a IMAP server. It doesn't matter if qpopper were one-ten-thousandth the size or demands of Dovecot if it can't do the job. A jack hammer can do jobs that a toothpick can't. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. Every decision you make closes of some avenues and opens up others. Damon chose to use two machines to do a job that might under other circumstances been done with just one. He chose to run a job configured in a certain way under cron which was in turn configured a certain way. He chose to have notification of the results delivered by email. He could have made other choices. He still can revise some of those choices. If anybody is 'forcing' you then in reality it is you, because of a focus on choices. You could, for example, as Carlos pointed out, use webpin for find that qpopper *is* in fact available for 13.1. Context is everything. I've made different choices from you, have different motivations, needs and values. Dovecot does a job for me that qpopper cannot, and when I look at the numbers I disagree with you about bloat. When I run 'ps' and look at the viral and physical memory demands, the cumulative cpu demands of Dovecot it is the lightest of the applications I run, lighter than any of the KDE components. And so massively lighter than Thunderbird! If Dovecot is a jack-hammer then we are getting jack-hammer capability for tooth-pick price. Those are the numbers. -- /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML Mail / \ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org