MTA in ubuntu desktop

[Matt Zimmerman]

On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 10:14:22AM +0100, Thibaut Varene wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 17:24:02 -0800, Matt Zimmerman <mdz at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > Users who need an LSB environment can install the package, which should
> > ideally bring them into compliance (though we don't know whether this is
> > true for Hoary).
> 
> I disagree. Being LSB compliant should be something a Linux
> distribution aim at. That's why the LSB project was founded, so that a
> user knows that when s/he has a LSB compliant distro, s/he can use
> third party software which rely on such compliance.
> 
> In the long run I'm quite afraid you might loose potential user by
> breaking LSB compliance in the default install... This is IMHO a very
> Bad Thing (tm).

Consider that no one has tested, or even expressed interest in testing, the
LSB compliance of Ubuntu.  It's a bit premature to talk about "breaking"
compliance that has not even been established, and therefore I can't imagine
that many users have chosen Ubuntu for LSB compliance either.

Furthermore, the Ubuntu base/server install does not include lsb, and is
unlikely to ever do so because its dependencies are inappropriate for many
systems (printing, mail, development libraries).

Currently, the desktop install contains the lsb package, and the base system
contains postfix.  What we are talking about here is removing postfix from
base, which is only relevant to LSB in the context of the desktop install.

I think that the difference in utility between "LSB by default in the
desktop install" and "LSB when package 'lsb' is installed" is extremely
marginal.

> 1) If the main concern is toward the default base policy about MTA
> setting (local delivery only), then why not asking the question of the
> delivery policy during base-install, having "local delivery" set as
> default (and recommended) choice?
> Then, if the user goes for that default choice, no more question is
> asked, else, s/he can configure the MTA in a more appropriate way.

Our focus for the install has always been simplicity, and we continue to
pursue that goal.  An esoteric about MTA configuration would be a step
backward.

> 2) If the main concern is toward the MTA choice, well then we're all
> screwed up ;) AFAICT, all distributions do make a choice for the
> default MTA, and everyone got along with it. Experienced-enough users
> willing to use *their* MTA can still install it afterwards...

We already do many things differently from other distributions, and I have
no reservations about diverging further, in pursuit of making Ubuntu more
flexible and usable.

For information about the concerns, and the reasoning that brought us to the
current proposal, review the logs from the technical board meeting of
2005-01-18.

-- 
 - mdz