--On 17 July 2009 11:21:41 +0100 Niall Mansfield
<niall.mansfield@???> wrote:
> So far, only 3 people said are interested in Exin BOF :-(
Build it, and they will come. If we put enough marketing effort in. There
are a few Exim or email related talks, at which we could announce a BOF -
if the BOF is later in the weekend.
3 is better than 2, anyway.
> Niall Mansfield
> UIT Cambridge Ltd.
> nmm@???
> +44 1223 302 041
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 17 Jul 2009, at 11:10, Ian Eiloart <iane@???> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> --On 16 July 2009 15:27:53 +0100 Alain Williams <addw@???>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I think that it would be very helpful if we were to prepare some kind
>>> of outline on what we would like to achieve. I'll chuck in a few
>>> suggestions to get the ball rolling:
>>>
>>> * Bug fixes - how we prioritise
>>>
>>> * Enhancements - what new features do we need
>>>
>>> * External changes - should we collect/merge back in ?
>>> I am thinking of changes that Linux-distros/... may have made.
>>>
>>> * Funding - could we pursuade some large corporates/... with a bit of
>>> funding that could be used to pay someone to do this -- perhaps
>>> part
>>> time.
>>
>> Clearly, funding (if achievable in the current climate) is going to
>> make the biggest difference, but we should also consider some other
>> ways to attract new developers, and new users (who may contribute):
>>
>> * Easing the development process. I'm not a developer myself, so I'm
>> not sure what the technical barriers to involvement are.
>>
>> * Marketing/Promotion: improving uptake of Exim might enlarge the
>> potential pool of developers, and of funding. The last research I
>> saw put Exim behind about 10 - 20% of MX hosts, which is great. We
>> should trumpet that. An overhaul of the web site, or an additional
>> site, would be an option.
>>
>> * Advertising: how about we put a link in every 5xx reply message.
>> The link would go to an Exim hosted page explaining (as far as we
>> can) the cause of the rejection. The root of the URL should be
>> customisable, so that administrators can point to their own web
>> pages instead. Of course, we could provide the default content for
>> those pages, too. While we're at it, we could meet one of the
>> lemonade spec requirements by adding RFC2034 enhanced error codes.
>> So far, that's just a feature request for improved rejection
>> messages, but all of the Exim hosted web pages could carry
>> advertising, and all of the default pages could carry promotional
>> messages for Exim, OSS concepts, etc.
>>
>> * Improving ease of use (installation, configuration, queue
>> management, reporting)
>>
>> * Auto-reporting. ClamAV, for example, can be configured to send
>> statistical reports to developers. That lets them track malware
>> traffic and use of ClamAV automatically. Exim is in a position to do
>> the same, perhaps reporting stats on traffic volumes, spam patterns,
>> technology penetration, etc. Perhaps that counts as a feature
>> request, but it could also have some mileage with regard to
>> promotion. Care should be taken to protect privacy, of course.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I nominate Niall & myself as scribes of the event -- to try and get
>>> some
>>> kind of report out to this list/whereever.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alain Williams
>>> Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking,
>>> Programmer,
>>> IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 http://www.phcomp.co.uk/
>>> Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information:
>>> http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php Past chairman of UKUUG:
>>> http://www.ukuug.org/
>>> # include <std_disclaimer.h>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ian Eiloart
>> IT Services, University of Sussex
>> 01273-873148 x3148
>> For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
