Author: Drav Sloan Date: To: Exim User's Mailing List Subject: Re: [exim] a large number of domains fronted by Exim are refusing
bounces...
Greg A. Woods wrote: > > No, Exim should NOT be made more difficult to configure.
>
> I didn't say it hould be more difficult to configure. I said it should
> make it more difficult to do such stupid things with such core critical
> error handling features of the protocol.
If you are an admin that does dumb things with your server, then
surely thats the problem of that admin and not Exim. Exim (as far
as I can tell) was designed to be functional but also as lightweight
as can be. Adding tonnes of 'nanny' code to deal with idiots who
run a service but can't be bothered to learn the standards and
nettiquete seems like an extremely pointless addition as well as
totally unneccessary.
If you are deciding to run a internet service, it is your _own_
responsibility to administer that service properly and to have a
handle on said standards and to know the generally accepted way of
running that service. If you don't, then thats your fault and not
something Exim should have to 'nanny'.
I like unix for the fact that it doesn't spend all it's time trying
to tell me what I should or shouldn't do (unlike some OSes I could
care to mention). I can understand your passion for somebody setting
up Exim to do soemthing (that in your eyes) seems like a bad thing
to do, but that doesn't mean Exim should be looking out for this
and having to cater for this situation or any other. The idea is
if your administering it, you should have clue what your doing, or
suffer the consquences of your actions (ending up on RBLs, getting
blacklisted by IP, or being firewalled).
Oh also, somebody in the thread said that 'delete' wont delete
protected files or locked files - this is not neccessarily the case,
and as root it _will_ not prompt Y/n unless (like under Linux) the
rm command has been aliased to 'rm -i'
