e: [Mailman-Users] Contemplating new installation
At 7:21 PM + 2006-07-26, Jon Loose wrote:
> The new project is a fedora core based server, purchased on a subscription.
> It runs qmail by default,
Ouch.
>and has plesk running to give some web-ba
At 10:22 PM -0400 2006-07-26, Todd Zullinger wrote:
>> They've done whatever they've done and didn't ask for any
>> involvement from us.
>
> That doesn't seem entirely fair to the Red Hat/Fedora folks. John
> Dennis of Red Hat very clearly solicited comment on these changes on
> mailman-deve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 7:21 PM + 2006-07-26, Jon Loose wrote:
[...]
>> Second, my previous install of mailman was 2.1.x running under
>> /usr/local/mailman. I note that the fedora installation already
>> seems to have mailman files distribute
At 7:21 PM + 2006-07-26, Jon Loose wrote:
> The new project is a fedora core based server, purchased on a subscription.
> It runs qmail by default,
Ouch.
>and has plesk running to give some web-based
> admin.
Double ouch.
> Given the constraint that
Jon Loose wrote:
>
>First off, I've read that there are some unique issues with qmail/mailman.
>Does this make installation significantly harder than with a postfix system
>(it was as much as I could do to get the postfix/mailman system going - but
>I'm willing to persevere!) What are the main
Hi,
I'm contemplating using mailman in a new system setup, and am hoping I could
get a "heads up" warning about potential problems from the list before killing
too much time on it.
I have installed mailman before, using postfix on a redhat (ClarkConnect)
server. It took a bit of fiddling with
